Terror From The Stalinist Left

We have repeatedly warned Hillary supporters in our comments section to beware of signing up to any and all websites that purport to support Hillary Clinton. That is less of a problem now that Barack Obama Thugs (hereinafter, B.O.T.s) lull themselves into thinking that Hillary Clinton is a spent political force. But it certainly was a problem during the primary campaigns and the general election campaign when B.O.T.s set up websites purporting to support Hillary in order to garner user information and wreak havoc. We have always suggested that Hillary Supporters create new email accounts whenever they sign up to a new site, an email that is not the same as on other accounts.

This repeat warning is precipitated by an article published by Michelle Malkin today. Before we discuss that article a bit of history here at Big Pink.

Because we were the first Hillary supporting website and one that unashamedly called out Barack Obama and the Nutroots for their ugly tactics we were subjected to ceaseless attempts to destroy us.

Barack Obama supporters would attempt to post comments with a few sentences lavishing praise on Hillary Clinton and then immediately launch into racist attacks against Barack Obama. The “N” word was often and repeatedly used. We traced the writers of these comments to Nutroot sites and “gamer” sites who openly called on their cabals to “expose” us as “racists” by they themselves posting racist comments of the ugliest sort.

It was not just these Nutroot sites that indulged in unethical methods. One “news” website (yes we mean Politico) sent “infections” to us via email. Donna Brazile publicly declared that she was calling Hillary Clinton to complain about us and shut us down. Donna, in full nut mode even resorted to “I believe the vast right wing is also behind these rants.” Donna also declared Hillary unfit to be president because “no one who provoke [sic] this kind of anger in voters deserves to be President.” No word these days from Brazile regarding the anger stirred by Barack Obama.

On Nutroot website after website, calls were made to demand Hillary shut us down. Hillary’s campaign responded with a defense of free speech.

At least one website was created to torment our readers and to “expose” them for whatever reason the fool website owner deemed sufficient reason. We manged to trace most of these loons and warn them we knew who they were. Some of these thugs were computer students about to graduate or in graduate school. These people should not be allowed near computers let alone use school property and resources to carry on their thuggery.

Hillary Clinton Youtube videos were altered in vicious ways and the altered versions were deliberately, and in an organized manner by Barack Obama supporters, ranked high in order to suppress Hillary Clinton’s message. The strategy of Google bombs was devised by one particularly sad Obama apologist, currently on NothingLeft, whereby the few articles with positive comments about Hillary Clinton were buried and articles praising Barack Obama (were there any other kind?) were raised to high levels on the Google search lists.

All these tactics were mean to suppress information. Voters who sought information were deprived of that information by these Stalinists of the Dimocratic Left. Critical stories about the dubious histories of Nutroots leaders leaders were likewise suppressed. One blogger who engaged in “hump and dump” stock schemes was protected by the Nutroots cabal and we have yet to hear that story fully aired, even though we were always assured that the facts would someday be released by these Stalinists.

What these B.O.T.s have always engaged in is suppression of speech and attempts to distort the truth and rewrite history. These Stalinist B.O.T.s never cared about issues, it has always been a cult of personality with them.

The Hillbuzz guys have written repeatedly about their experiences with these B.O.T.s. Many pro-Hillary websites hosted by Google Blogger were shut down by Obama B.O.T.s.

We have repeatedly warned Sarah Palin supporters and indeed, back in 2009 we warned John McCain supporters, that the tactics employed by these Stalinist Obama thugs would be turned on them. We were correct on that and now there is proof.

Today Michelle Malkin (we never thought we would quote her with anything approaching praise, but she deserves it here) published an “illustrated guide to the Tea Party saboteurs” which recalls to a “T” the race-baiting tactics deployed against us and other Hillary supporting websites:

Over the last week, conservative activists online have thoroughly exposed the loser behind an Internet call to “Crash the Tea Party.” His name is Jason Levin. To follow his trail, check Free Republic here, Canada Free Press here, and Velvet Hammer here. After failing to cover his tracks, Levin is now basking in the glow of attention on his tpartycrasher Twitter page and on his personal Twitter page (where he brags that he has hit the big time and “gone viral:”)

He’s infected alright — with an acute case of Wannabefamousitis.

Conservative blogs and talk radio have spread the word about possible shenanigans promoted by Levin, including this:

We will act on behalf of the Tea Party in ways which exaggerate their least appealing qualities (misspelled protest signs, wild claims in TV interviews, etc.) to further distance them from mainstream America and damage the public’s opinion of them. We will also use the inside information that we have gained in order to disrupt and derail their plans.”

Levin registered his site under a phony name on April 3, 2010. He’s just the latest in a long line of left-wing leeches and anarchist clowns trying to discredit Tea Party activism and mask their roles as agents provocateur.

Time was we would call Michelle Malkin the nut, but experience teaches us she is on target here. Malkin leaves out the “Stalinist” but she is right about these “agents provacateur”. These Stalinists are the first to jump up and down when free speech is suppressed or point to CoIntelPro tactics used against the Left in bygone days. They have become what they used to fight. Now it is what passes for the Democratic Left that expends its resources on “infiltrating, disrupting, marginalizing, and/or subverting groups“. And don’t doubt that links to the Obama campaign/White House will eventually be uncovered.

Other conservative websites are on the lookout for agents provacateurs and finding them in abundance. The aim is to disrupt and to create distortions about the Tea Party activists and all they stand for. Images of Sarah Palin “and i usually dig crazy bitches” are near duplicates of what Hillary Clinton is subjected to by the right and the “left”.

And the “racist” smears will continue. The CoIntelPro style tactics will continue as well:

Before them, it was Craig Varoga — a shady Democrat political operative and overseer of a convoluted, money-shuffling web of 527s. He launched “TheTeaPartyisOver.org” in January to target Republicans who supported the Tea Party movement and to prevent the “radical” and “dangerous” fiscal accountability agenda from “gaining legislative traction.” [snip]

Free Republic, Ed Morrissey, Lee Doren, the American Thinker, Fox News, and NPR (yes, NPR!) have all reported on Varoga’s funneling schemes designed to obscure the Big Labor/progressive funding of his Astroturf enterprises under the “American Public Policy Center (APPC)” umbrella. Via FNC’s Joseph Abrams:

Here’s how it works: What appears like a local groundswell is in fact the creation of two men — Craig Varoga and George Rakis, Democratic Party strategists who have set up a number of so-called 527 groups, the non-profit election organizations that hammer on contentious issues (think Swift Boats, for example).

Varoga and Rakis keep a central mailing address in Washington, pulling in soft money contributions from unions and other well-padded sources to engage in what amounts to a legal laundering system. The money — tens of millions of dollars — gets circulated around to different states by the 527s, which pay for TV ads, Internet campaigns and lobbyist salaries, all while keeping the hands of the unions clean — for the most part.

The system helps hide the true sources of funding, giving the appearance of locally bred opposition in states from Oklahoma to New Jersey, or in the case of the Tea Party Web site, in Illinois. And this whitewash is entirely legal, say election law experts, who told FoxNews.com that this arrangement more or less the norm in Washington. “It’s not illegal but it is, I think, dishonest on the part of the organizations,” said Paul Ryan, a legal counsel at the Campaign Legal Center. “And there’s a reason they do it: they know voters don’t like outsiders coming in to sway the vote.”

Calls and e-mails to the Maryland-based consultant firm Independent Strategies, run by Varoga and Rakis, were not returned.

Outside of that firm, the center of their activity appears to be a single office in Southeast D.C. — 300 M Street, Suite 1102 — which plays host to a sprawling political shell game they have established. Public records show at least seven political shops listed in Suite 1102, most of which are essentially clones of one another, but all of which have offered money — from measly thousands to game-changing millions — in state-level elections across the country…

Barack Obama holds another meaningless publicity stunt today. The publicity stunt is about nuclear something or other and always “protecting” America. But the best way for Obama to protect America is to get his B.O.T.s out of their Stalinist terror games and to get himself out of office.

Share

177 thoughts on “Terror From The Stalinist Left

  1. gonzotx
    April 12th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
    As for Taylor, I’m just asking that we not be so hard on her. She did’t desert Hillary, she followed her: She supported o as Hillary did, and willingly voted for o by listening to his platform. After all, anyone who listened to o and took his words seriously would have thought he wasn’t much different from Hillary. But since o’s inauguration, TM has found many things to criticize about o, and considers him to be pretty lame. “He’s the problem” is a direct quote from her. She’s really down on him, which brings her back into our ranks.
    *************

    Jesus! Why would ANYONE read ANYTHING TM writes? She has no standing and just goes with the prevailing wind. You all know she was in the sex trade business in the past, right…and a traitor to Hillary. I woulds say she has no ovarian fortitude, but that would be giving her too much credit I think. I left her looong ago. Loser comes to mind… She has no insights worth my time…

  2. jeswezey
    April 12th, 2010 at 10:08 am
    Taylor Marsh just had a bad day. I’ve been reading her over the past couple of months (she blocked me from the blog in September 08) and she’s really down on o and thinks Hillary’s career is over. You must forgive her for that last bit, because I, too, think Hillary will not get into elective politics again, just out of realism. I think we’re all trying desperately to read presidential hopes into Hillary’s every word. Personally, I don’t think it will happen – no “window of opportunity” for her
    *************

    Sorry, I must look nuts! I was reacting to jeswezy’s comment about TM. Not arguing with myself!

  3. #
    turndownobama
    April 12th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    mj, is there a typo in your recent post? Taylor Marsh talked about always being a Democrat. Did she really ever support Reagan? She did switch from Hillary to Obama at a critical time in spring 2008 and then was very abusive to Pumas though they were originally strong members of her site.

    Yes, she called herself a former “Reagan Democrat”. She’s not very bright.

  4. #
    jeswezey
    April 12th, 2010 at 10:08 am

    Taylor Marsh just had a bad day. I’ve been reading her over the past couple of months (she blocked me from the blog in September 08) and she’s really down on o and thinks Hillary’s career is over. You must forgive her for that last bit, because I, too, think Hillary will not get into elective politics again, just out of realism. I think we’re all trying desperately to read presidential hopes into Hillary’s every word. Personally, I don’t think it will happen – no “window of opportunity” for her.

    —-

    Wha? Do tell, for whom is there a better window of opportunity? Which Democrat has more of a natural base, or two, or three, than Hillary? There is n evidence to support your, or Ms. Marsh’s thesis. Indeed, it’s absurd. I ask who is it who possesses a better opportunity over the horizon. I see no one. As for her “looking old” and retiring to be a teacher, you must be joking. She doesn’t seem to want to retire at all. Why on earth is she still giving speeches in Kentucky if she’s looking forward to retiring? This is just silliness.

  5. Wow, a new post, still posting downstairs……..

    #
    admin
    April 12th, 2010 at 12:55 pm

    Shadowfax, no doubt the Hillbuzz boys would at least enjoy the video. 🙂

    BTW, is your name from LOTR?
    ——-

    Yes, the Hillbuzz boys would enjoy it, and so do most of us ladies. 😆

    Yes, LOTR…….for sure. 😆

  6. It is amazing how today’s Dimocrats are yesterday’s Republicans. The Head Kook – a homophobe Republican/CIA recruit now leads the supposed “left”. Arriana Huffington, an old time Hillary Hater and Newt Gingrich high priestess until Newt dumper her like he dumped his wife. The blue boy over at Balloonjuice, Republican. Andrew Sullivan, Republican. Go down the list.

  7. WOW!!!!!!!!

    What a fascinating, insightful, educational and terrifying post, admin!

    You have really schooled me on the anatomy of an internet slur.

    JEEEEEZ! Tracking them down, keeping up with them, squashing them and revealing them is a full time job!

    How do you do it?

    There must be a small army of admin’s at 44.

  8. This all makes me sick.
    I hate the Republican party, always have.
    I now hate the Democratic party, for what it did and continues to do, and for all those that fight to manipulate the voters.

    The only thing I can do is vote all the traitors out of office.

  9. No, Hillary Clinton will not be President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee.

    That’s the message from the White House on Monday, amidst growing speculations that the Secretary of State might be tapped to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.

    “The President thinks Secretary Clinton is doing an excellent job as Secretary of State and wants her to remain in that position,” said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor, Politico’s Ben Smith reports.

    Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) fueled the discussion when he floated Clinton as a possibility, saying Monday morning on NBC’s “The Today Show” that he has “high respect for her” and thinks a “great deal of” Obama’s chief rival for the Democratic nomination in 2008.

    The idea was suggested soon after Stevens announced his intention to retire this year.

    http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0412/white-house-hillary-scotus/

    Link posted at the Pac

  10. Those damn Republicans. They screwed up their own party, and now feel the need to screw ours up too. Great detective work admin. Stopping by here is just like going to school. I learn alot.

  11. Well, that’s a relief! I had figured out it was the republicans way to see if she would bite. It’s killing them not knowing what to do about Hillary…ROTFLMAO!

    Of coarse Obama wants to keep her as SOS…she does all the work! At least now, we can all hope she will run…she will not be too old if Newt isn’t then she wont either. He was born in 43 so that makes him 65 and he would be almost 67 when he took office, so the age thing is off the table!

  12. I couldn’t of thought anything worse than bury Hillary is the supreme court. I think it might be a black woman…which would be great! We need more women and an AA liberal would be good.

  13. At least now, we can all hope she will run…she will not be too old if Newt isn’t then she wont either. He was born in 43 so that makes him 65 and he would be almost 67 when he took office, so the age thing is off the table!
    ———-
    Using age is just an excuse to make someone seem incompetent. If age was really an issue, the members on the Supreme Court would be put out to pasture a looooooong time ago………

    Inexperienced, youngsters like to play the ‘Age Card’, as if a lack of experience is no big deal………we all see how well the Fraud is doing in the polls.

    Palin is young and pretty, and trashed by Dems and Repugs.
    Hillary has been trashed all of her career for being too competent and putting so many to shame.

  14. Shadowfax, We have had many discussion’s about Hillary’s age in 2016′ here on the blog, many times by the very same folks who keep bringing Newt as a great candidate this season. It never donned on these folks Hillary would be younger than Newt..but that did not stop them from ruling her out in 16′ because she would be too old. Its the old double standard.

    We’ll see how the republicans nominate this season…if its Newt or Mittens, then it will be OK for Hillary…afterall she’s the same age as Mittens and younger than Newt.

  15. No, Hillary Clinton will not be President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee.

    That’s the message from the White House on Monday, amidst growing speculations that the Secretary of State might be tapped to replace retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.

    “The President thinks Secretary Clinton is doing an excellent job as Secretary of State and wants her to remain in that position,” said White House spokesman Tommy Vietor, Politico’s Ben Smith reports.

    Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) fueled the discussion when he floated Clinton as a possibility, saying Monday morning on NBC’s “The Today Show” that he has “high respect for her” and thinks a “great deal of” Obama’s chief rival for the Democratic nomination in 2008.

    The idea was suggested soon after Stevens announced his intention to retire this year.

    http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0412/white-house-hillary-scotus/

    Link posted at the Pac
    ————————-
    The chances of this were ZERO. Big media hyped it because they want her off the stage. Kerry wanted it. It was never in the cards. Good old big media: seldom right but never in doubt, always willing to destroy anyone who disagrees with them. A sorrier collection of scumbags you will never find.

  16. Well maybe not in 2016, but maybe in 2020 and we cannot rule out 2024 either. At that point she will be a mere 77.

    If Hillary does not run in 2012 we will have a republican president and he will be closer to Obama’s age.

    Age, experience and a proven track record of performance are a deterrent in job markets as well as politics.

    Bear in mind, I am not talking about you and me, I am talking about the brand buying youth adoring public.

  17. confloyd

    I don’t take people seriously that think Hillary is/may be/will be too old to be President. They don’t support her for all she has accomplished, and have their own reasons for attaching to the PUMA blogs.

    That’s my take on it and I am stickin’ to it. 😆

  18. Barack Obama holds another meaningless publicity stunt today. The publicity stunt is about nuclear something or other and always “protecting” America. But the best way for Obama to protect America is to get his B.O.T.s out of their Stalinist terror games and to get himself out of office.
    ———————————————-
    At this point they do not have the 67 votes.

  19. If Hillary does not run in 2012 we will have a republican president and he will be closer to Obama’s age.

    ———-
    Don’t bet on a Repug president in 2012 if Hillary doesn’t run. It depends on who the Repugs push to the front of the line. Many independents and PUMAs will not vote for a rightwing candidate like Mittens or the Gecko.

  20. They have only 59 if the democrats (60 with Biden as President Pro Tem). All 60 can be counted upon to vote in favor of this defective legislation which weakens out nation. The question is are there 7 people on the other side of the aisle willing to betray the nation as well in exchange for whatever threats, bribes or other inducements Obama and his Chicago thugs are prepared to offer?

  21. Don’t bet on a Repug president in 2012 if Hillary doesn’t run. It depends on who the Repugs push to the front of the line. Many independents and PUMAs will not vote for a rightwing candidate like Mittens or the Gecko.
    ——————————————-
    Oh, I think they will get it right this time. There will be more players in the line up than currently meets the eye. I have already alluded to who some of them will be.

  22. I believe if Bambi runs again he will select Sebenius to be his vp. She is presentable, not terribly brignt and has no star power.

    That is anther reason why we cannot allow bambi to run again.

  23. Many independents and PUMAs will not vote for a rightwing candidate like Mittens or the Gecko.
    ————————————–
    Our state is a red state with a blue hole in the middle. With strong support a mere 38% support in the key red counties McCain could have won the state. I offered to set up a meeting with the mc cain people and the pumas in the red districts. I made that offer through his state campaign chairman who is an old friend. There was no follow-up. Pauli Abeles did the same thing with McCain himself on the east coast. I hope the Rs are smarter now, but I do not know that.

  24. Oh, I think they will get it right this time. There will be more players in the line up than currently meets the eye. I have already alluded to who some of them will be.
    ——
    “…get it right this time”?
    Sorry, but I am not a Repug and I can’t think of one person that is ‘right’.
    Right for Repugs is white male with a pretty, cheerleader VP.

    The younger voter is not in the majority on the right, so trying to copy the Obama recipe will not necessarily work for them.

    We saw how corrupt Obama and the DNC were during the primaries, it is gonna be really ugly in 2012, I fear.

  25. Shadowfax
    April 12th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
    ——————————
    You really hate republicans as a group, don’t you.

    I do not. I see them as a useful counter force.

  26. Sebelius is as boring as store bought white bread. She absolutely has NO personality, but she’s quiet and knows her place, I imagine that is why Obama likes her.

  27. I hope the Rs are smarter now, but I do not know that.
    —-
    I wondered when the Repugs were going to roll out the big tanks in the election and wipe the Fraud off the map………they never did. Obama and his ACORN bros, ran amuck and the R’s just took a nap?

    To me, McPalin was as good as it could get for a Repug team, but I guess not good enough for the rightwing clan.

  28. I think the republicans are playing controlled opposition for Obama, at the least the corporate part of them. I think that’s why they threw around Hillary’s name today.

  29. admin
    April 12th, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    It is amazing how today’s Dimocrats are yesterday’s Republicans. The Head Kook – a homophobe Republican/CIA recruit now leads the supposed “left”. Arriana Huffington, an old time Hillary Hater and Newt Gingrich high priestess until Newt dumper her like he dumped his wife. The blue boy over at Balloonjuice, Republican. Andrew Sullivan, Republican. Go down the list.

    ———

    Agreed 100%, Admin, and a very astute observation. It is something I have noticed as well, albeit, on a much smaller scale.

    Back during the earliest days of the primaries, when I was doing my own blogging and hadn’t found this site, one trend seemed to be reoccurring — that the most vicious of attacks would always be coming from the same group of people.

    Curious to as who these folks were — as 1) their contempt for Hillary stood out, particularly for so called Democrats; and 2) they tried to go after my privacy — I did some work to trace who and what they were all about. Each time, each investigation would always lead to the same conclusion — that these Obama supporters were former Republicans, now turned “Democrat.” They were people who were Republican all their life, voted for Bush, TWICE, but now were claiming to be “Democrats.”

    But one thing, noticeably, that they didn’t forget in their so called political conversion was pathological hate for Hillary, a hate which was in stark contrast to how REAL Democrats were acting back then. Real Democrats, even if they weren’t Hillary supporters, had nowhere near the anger and hysteria against Hillary, that these former Republicans now turned Obama supporters sure did.

    Honestly, I wish these folks had just stayed in their own party. They were cowards who abandoned their own ship when it was going down, and then came to ours to try and wreck it. Who knows, perhaps they thought that if they could only get a Democrat in office, then somehow they might be absolved of their previous errors.

    Of course, they failed at that too, because they have only compounded (and not corrected) their errors by helping to elect yet another boob. (No offense to President Bush for comparing him to Obama LOL).

  30. When I say get it right, I mean figure out what they need to do to defeat Obama. I assume you want that?

    This country runs best when it has a democratic party which fights for the rights of average Americans and has the audacity to dream of better times, and a republican party which adopts portions of that vision while keeping control of costs.

    It function best when there are checks and balances and bi partisanship. It functions worst when people believe that their party is always right and the other is always wrong.

    The Republican Party is not monolythic. There is the neocon wing, the business wing and the grass roots limited government wing. There are urban and rural republicans. They come from different strata of society. They are not all white male.

  31. You really hate republicans as a group, don’t you.
    ——-

    I am a centralist Clinton Democrat, I do not believe that all the ‘mistakes’ made in the Bush years has just somehow disappeared from the Repug party.

    For example, repeal and replace the health care bill……the repeal could happen but replace with something good, I don’t think will EVAH happen with the Repugs. Women’s reproductive rights, nevah……
    I have many reasons to not trust them, I have new reasons not to trust the Dems. I have no party.

  32. The Obama thugs better not get it in their head that Biden can come in to the Senate and vote with them with any regularity. If I remember correctly, the VP can only vote if there is a TIE (maybe someone knows more about this and can correct me).

    If that is indeed the case, Biden will not and should not be permitted to become a de facto voting member of the Senate. The Democrats lost the 60 majority under Barack Obama’s leadership, no shenanigans now to get around that. We all need to play by the rules (not Brazilda’s rules, real rules lol).

    As for the Dem majority, we will simply rebuild it when Hillary takes her rightful place.

  33. Shadowfax,I understand where your coming from…with all the republicans turned democrat with CDS, I think it is just as much fault of the repubs that we have Obama. The RWN’s staying home, the Rino’s crossing over and sabatoging the caucas’s and the Hillary hating BM.

    It’s downright disgusting, I feel I have no party either. If Hillary doesn’t run, I hope someone comes on the scene I can feel confortable with, but I don’t know if they have an R behind their name if I can do it.

  34. wbboei

    I agree there should be a balance of power, no party should be able to push their agenda though without the checks and balances………

    however…………

    Nasty and Reid proved to voters that no supermajority is needed, only the new and improved reconciliation way of pushing things though is needed.

    You might be right, but then again, the Repugs might be as bad as they have always been.

    I can’t call the Repugs the only bad guys in this drama, the Dems are also the bad guys now.

    I have very, very few politicians I trust now.

  35. Everything I read is that the republicans are also in disarray and are trying desparately to get control of the tea party. Its really quiet funny now that faux news that Hillary was in the running for Scotus.

  36. I think the republicans are playing controlled opposition for Obama, at the least the corporate part of them. I think that’s why they threw around Hillary’s name today.
    ——————————————–
    No they are playing to their base.

    But do not make the mistake that the other commentor did that they are all alike. There are strong animostities between the factions in that party as well. If you read the conservative blogs, they are closer to your position than you think. They hate the corportists, want all incumbents defeated because they are too close to them, and hope for a new generation of republican leaders who respect the traditions of this country and oppose big business.

    So you know, the Republican Congresswoman I was friends with and advised had precisely the same philosophy as Ron Paul. She had no affiliation whatsoever with the big business republicans. At the same time, I knew and greatly respected the late Paul Wellstone. If you define politics in terms of party or left right you will miss the point. The real war here is between those who support the people and those who support corporations. I always support the former.

    Finally, the line that the Republican Party is the party of white males is offensive because it is untrue and is a tactical attempt to divide the party by race and gender. As you may recall, Howard Dean in the primary said the Republican Party is the white party, the DNC has invoked the images of slavery etc. His goal was and is to divide the nation. Also he is a coward, who lacks the courage of his own convictions.

  37. Fifth Dimension
    As for the Dem majority, we will simply rebuild it when Hillary takes her rightful place.

    confloyd
    It’s downright disgusting, I feel I have no party either. If Hillary doesn’t run, I hope someone comes on the scene I can feel confortable with, but I don’t know if they have an R behind their name if I can do it.
    ————–
    Yup, I agree with both of you.

  38. I do agree that Howard Dean is Coward Dean.

    Let me clarify why I said the republican party is controlled opposition…I was speaking of Beck and his minions. I have to admit the man that said nice things about Hillary this morning, Orin Hatch went up in my books…now if they would all do that…some Pumas and independents might be able to hold their noses and vote for one of them.

    Mittens screwed up with me the other day on Fox when he looked his nose down on Hillary when Cavuto compared his wife to Hillary…blatant sexism there…us wimmen folk should know their places.

  39. Shadowfax: forgive me. I just got back from a colonoscopy and the sedation is staring to wear off. Obviously, they started at the wrong end.

  40. Well I think all of our moves over the next few months will have to be well thought. For instance, if Republicans take back the House and the Senate (though the Senate seems unlikely), that is good in the short term. It will force the Dims to scale back from the tyranny of the majority, the abuse of power which has gone to their head. That might not be good for Dims, but it will be good for the country, which is much more important.

    But what of the long term? If Republicans win back control of both Houses of Congress, what will this mean in 2012? I know their are Congressional elections in 2012, but consider the following scenario: if Republicans are in control of Congress in 2012, and Obama is running in 2012, Obama’s defeat would be mean the Republicans controlling both the Congress and the White House.

    That might be good for Republicans, but just as I said above, that will likely not be good for the country. I’m not sure the Republicans can be trusted to lead all of these two branches of the government anymore the Dems have been able.

    That said, I don’t think any of us wants a second Obama term either.

    So what do we do? There has to be another option…..and again, I find myself coming back to Hillary. 😉

    BTW, do not misunderstand me if I have not stated myself clearly. I am not saying that Republicans shouldn’t make significant, devastating gains in Congress this year. It is a necessary compromise. But just thinking outloud what the long term implications are. I’d almost prefer it if they take back the House, with the Senate remaining in Democrat hands. This IMO will be one of the best launching points for 2012, whatever the political scene might be then.

  41. I have to think that most of the world’s leaders feel the same way…Hillay is trustworthy while Dr. O is not, and most don’t and did not trust Bushie.

  42. confloyd

    Everything I read is that the republicans are also in disarray and are trying desparately to get control of the tea party.
    ——–
    Yes, listening to Fox news it is all about the Tea Party people. They feel if they can’t get them to vote for Repugs, the TP people will split the vote and (vote more as independents) instead of down repug party line and weaken their chances. Palin, and all their big names are trying to speak at their protests and ‘claim’ them.

    Funny, I would never call myself a conservative, but in contrast to the big Fraud spender, I am more conservative than he is. (That’s not saying much.)

    I have gone to a tea party in my area, and on another blog I was pelted with ‘Republican Astroturf’ comments. I wore my Hillary t-shirt and stood with other PUMAs there, all the Repugs knew we were against the Fraud and not supporting their party. It was fun and we were accepted.

  43. I wish someone could show me some proof that my glorious Governor is not a Rino…mainly because Sarah has been campaigning for the maggot. I hate that because I had great hopes for Sarah. I am now uncomfortable with Sarah, so I am really lost now.

  44. This is off topic but I just caught a glimpse of Obama and the Chinese walking across some room on Fox. LOL!! Obama looked as if he was marching. Two communists side by side!

  45. Let me clarify why I said the republican party is controlled opposition…I was speaking of Beck and his minions. I have to admit the man that said nice things about Hillary this morning, Orin Hatch went up in my books…now if they would all do that…some Pumas and independents might be able to hold their noses and vote for one of them.
    ———————————————‘
    Then you mean FOX NEWS.

    What I hope is that the dimocrats get slaughtered at mid terms, and someone whispers in the ear of the victorious Republicans that the Jacksonian forces have been awakened, this time you were the beneificiary, but next time you will be the victim if you sell them down the river to please your corporate masters like Obama did. If you want to succeed you must realign government with the interests of the American People, protect their liberty and rebuild the economy.

  46. OMG, you just won’t believe Beck today, I will follow up on this later. He wants to show us how to slash the budget.

  47. The tea parties should not allow themselves to be co-opted by either party. If they stay outside they can be allies to factions withing both parties which oppose the global corporatist agenda.

  48. I agree with, we need for the dims to lose as many seats in the congress as possible…but I don’t want a repub Potus on top of that win…check and balances!

  49. The TEA Party has been saying that they are against all of the statists in Congress — Republicans and Democrats. Right now, the biggest offenders are the Democrats, so it makes sense that the reckoning they are exacting is aimed at the Democrats.

    But it is what will happen afterward that will reveal the true nature of the TEA party. Will they hold on to the belief on which they were founded, and hold Republicans also responsible after the elections, punishing them if they don’t? Or will they simply fall in the fold, and pave the way for a Congress and a Presidency controlled by Republicans in 2012?

    If the TEA party has any integrity (which for the moment, I believe they do), I hope they act as patriotically as the PUMAs. The best case scenario imo (a strong third party notwithstanding) for 2012 is Republicans having some power in Congress and a Democrat (other than Obama) having power in the WH. Everybody wins, and only then, I think, may this country find itself back on the right track.

  50. Oh Glenn Beck really needs to be thrown off the air, he just incites fear every day. I am not for knocking ones free speech, but this guy is dangerous.

  51. BTW, does anyone know anything about the special election tomorrow in Florida? It is to fill that mongrel Robert Wexler’s seat. (I’m sure many of us remember him as Obama’s campaign chair FL and also the 2008 Rules and By-Laws committee meeting).

    Wexler’s already gotten comeuppance which is good…..and while I know the district is heavily Democrat so it will probably elect a Democrat anyway……but if there’s one seat that would be nice to go to Republicans this year, it’d be this one. Anyway, I’m not holding my breath, given the political makeup of this district….but it’d be a nice bit of irony with a hint of justice. 🙂

  52. wbboei

    Shadowfax: forgive me. I just got back from a colonoscopy and the sedation is staring to wear off. Obviously, they started at the wrong end.
    ——
    No worries…take it easy after that procedure.
    I honestly don’t think all Repugs are any more the same than all Dems, but I still don’t trust either party now.

  53. confloyd

    Oh Glenn Beck really needs to be thrown off the air, he just incites fear every day. I am not for knocking ones free speech, but this guy is dangerous.

    ——–
    The only way I can watch Beck is with the sound off. His facial expressions and antics are pretty funny.
    His paranoia is frightening.

  54. 5th Dimension

    …..But what of the long term? If Republicans win back control of both Houses of Congress, what will this mean in 2012? I know their are Congressional elections in 2012, but consider the following scenario: if Republicans are in control of Congress in 2012, and Obama is running in 2012, Obama’s defeat would be mean the Republicans controlling both the Congress and the White House.

    ——
    I agree, I hope that the Dems lose enough seats to make the Fraud a really lame duck, but not give any majority to the Repugs. I know enough Independents and PUMAs will vote for some Repugs, so I don’t have to toss a vote to them.
    Getting a Repug in the Whitehouse again would almost be a terrible as a second term of the Fraud.
    If not Hillary in 2012, then who? I fear a hard core Repub, but I hope for a centralist either way.
    Not another Bush, nor Raygun, nor Mittens……..ugh. I am so sick of voting for the best of the worst candidates.

  55. Beck capitalized on the country’s disappointment with Obama at the right moment, which catapulted him to the place where he is now…..but he is skating precipitously close to turning into a one-hit wonder.

    He needs to be much less partisan, and much more reasonable and intellectual, if he wants to continue to have a serious audience.

    I’m not calling for the curtain on him just yet, he does serve some purpose (or did, haven’t watched him in a while) — but he needs to remember soon that he wasn’t given an audience just so we could replace Obama’s rants with his.

  56. The retirement announcement by Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens brings about the usual speculation about his replacement, as well as the retrospective of the retiring justice’s career. Much will be made of the oft-described collegiality of Justice Stevens, and deservedly so. He is by all accounts a decent man, a World War II veteran, and he is beyond question a Justice who wrote opinions across the spectrums of ideology and judicial philosophy, notably defending, in dissent, Congressional action to ban the desecration of the United States flag (see Texas v. Johnson, 491 U. S. 397).

    But make no mistake about Stevens’ legacy. He is, like virtually all modern liberal jurists, an activist who is not afraid to use the Court to achieve his own philosophical ends. And that tendency is as dangerous as a renegade president and Congress hell bent on increasing the power of the state at the expense of liberty, as is the case with the current regime.

  57. Revenge is a dish best served cold, it seems.

    NEW YORK – The son of a legendary New York congressman has announced he will challenge Rep. Charles Rangel.

    Assemblyman Adam Clayton Powell IV told supporters Monday it was time for new leadership in the district, which covers the heart of the city’s Harlem neighborhood.

    H/T The Corner, and that’s all the time we should waste on this story of the son of the man that Rangel ousted on an anti-corruption campaign… challenging Rangel on an anti-corruption campaign. No doubt one of Rangel’s children, or at this point grandsons will arise in time to challenge Adam Powell IV in turn, and so it will continue, without end…

    Alternatively, NY-15 could just elect Michel Faulkner: that would short-circuit the entire sad, sorry cycle. More on Michel here.

    Moe Lane

  58. Admin thank you for the education on internet sabatoge. I was very uneduated on the matter. It really scares me.

    I use to dislike Reps, and saw absolutely no good in them. After my Dim experience in 06, I don’t love them, but I feel both parties think they can do anything they want, as long as they get away with it. So I am more tolerant, and I will look at their candidate, and vote for them if feel they have some merit.

  59. wbboei
    April 12th, 2010 at 5:32 pm

    I do not think so. Actually, it is the conservative judges who most often legislate from the bench turning over acts of Congress at will in recent years, see federal elections comm. v. citizens united. Indeed, when one takes a look at the past few decades of rulings of the SC, one finds liberal justices have been much less likely to overturn law than conservative justices. You have to go back to the Warren Court to find much in the way of liberal activism from the bench.

  60. confloyd, the governor of Texas is a first class idiot, no offense. Sarah Palin is a conservative politician. On the issues, she is not very close to a Hillary Clinton.

    Both Parties have proven they really can not govern for the average American anymore. They are out of touch and both are beholden to the wealth class. I can not see voting for either myself at this point, though I do appreciate those who will cast a protest vote. I personally do not understand the need some have to feel good about the Republicans in order to cast a protest vote, but to each their own, I guess.

  61. Fifth Dimension
    April 12th, 2010 at 5:25 pm

    Beck is a partisan, and he is not reasonable or an intellectual. Materially he is very successful, and I don’t think that will change, while disaffected Democrats will grow weary of him, some of us never liked him at all, his base of support will continue to watch his show and buy his books.

  62. Mj
    I kind of feel the same way about voting, but since I distrust the Repugs more than my ‘old’ party, my plan is to vote out every traitor in the Dem party I can, and replace with new Dems…and maybe a Repug now and then if they are really lucky…

    If the Fraud, Nasty and Reid have either their jobs (Reid) taken away, or the majority taken away, new Dems voted in might not march in lock step with the Fraud. Then again, if only Repugs run against incumbent Dems, I will have to weigh their attachment to the Fraud vs how far right their voting record is.

    That’s my plan…except I also toss in more votes for women, just because they don’t have fair numbers representing 52% of the population. Those will probably be the one or two Repug votes I might might, if they are lucky. 🙂

  63. mj, Sarah was a ordinary person that I could identify with until she gave up her seat as Governor. I do agree she was only trying to save Alaska all these useless lawsuits. Sarah also fought the good old boys network in Alaska…I liked that…she also gave the money back to ordinary Alaskans…which I liked that…I don’t care about her religious activities anymore than I cared about Bill Clinton’s sex life. I want someone who will fight for the common man, which in my estimation comes from someone who has walked the walk and talked the talk of the ordinary man. That’s why Bill and Hillary are/were so popular and that’s exactly why the elitist Obama is hated by the avg person.

    Sarah started backing Perry the crook and now I am not so happy with her…she should’ve been more selective on who she campaigned for. I can however chalk it up to inexperience on her part if she soon figures all this out.

  64. confloyd

    I like Palin too, but am too skeptical these days to think she is centralist enough for me.
    I don’t see her stepping down from being a Governor just because she feared the loss of time and money on lawsuits. I think, personally, she stepped down to have more time to pay her dues to the Repug party, build a platform and possibly run in 2012.
    That being said, I love that she rails against the Fraud and shows him no mercy.

  65. shadowfax, I love that too, she nails the little usurper regularly, LOL! I also love that she is not afraid to fight the “good ole boy” network in the republican party. She fought those oil men in Alaska and showed no mercy to them. Thats why I think she would be good. I just worried when she campaigns for the Bush appointee Perry. I hopes it is just her inexperience or what you said “paying her dues” (yuk)!

    I agree with the Hillboyz…its either Hillary or Sarah, and that’s it.

    Do you know anything about Paul Ryan…I keep thinking he was the one that grilled Hillary when she was getting confirmed as SOS?? Not sure though!

  66. confloyd

    Honestly, I haven’t paid any attention to Paul Ryan…seen him on teevee, but that’s about it.

    Sarah is pretty true to Raygun policies…that’s why I couldn’t vote for her.

    He was my governor, and totally sucked. Trashed education and don’t forget his Star Wars program as Pres.

    Honestly, I doubt if the Repugs will let Sarah be their Presidential candidate, maybe VP cheerleader again. The good old boy network is really strong in both parties.

    Besides, I would be ticked off if Hillary wasn’t the woman to bust that glass ceiling.

  67. Actually, it is the conservative judges who most often legislate from the bench turning over acts of Congress at will in recent years, see federal elections comm. v. citizens united. Indeed, when one takes a look at the past few decades of rulings of the SC, one finds liberal justices have been much less likely to overturn law than conservative justices. You have to go back to the Warren Court to find much in the way of liberal activism from the bench.
    ——————————-
    1. Legislating From The Bench: typically this means a judge ignores the literal language of the statute, the regulation or the Constitution, and substitutes their own judgment in its stead and place. Liberal judges are more inclined to do this than conservatives. Why? Because true conservative judges consider themselves bound by the original intent of the Constitution, whereas liberal judges tend to see the Constitution as a document which must be updated with the times, which entails the creation of new rights and remedies never envisioned by the framers. Fundamentally, it is a tug of war between those who see the Constitution as a document for limited government vs those who see it powers as expansive to meet the challenges of each age. Thus, conservative judges do not legislate from the bench whereas liberal judges often do. (Note: often it is a matter of degree however, because every judge is required to say what the law is in order to decide a case.)

    2. Judicial Activism: typically, this involves overturning prior decisions of the Court. In the Warren Court era, this occurred with some degree of degree of regularity, starting with the case of Brown vs Board of Education of Topeka Kansas, which overturned Plessy vs Ferguson on the issue of separate but equal. But it can also be seen with certain decisions by the Rhenquist Court. Also, judicial activists tend to create new rights as in the case of the Lockner court which established the right to freedom of contract, and used it to strike down state protective laws guaranteeing an 8 hour day. And of course we saw it in the Warren Court which created the right to be be advised of the right to counsel etc.

    What you are really talking about, then, is judicial activism.

  68. confloyd
    April 12th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
    Oh Glenn Beck really needs to be thrown off the air, he just incites fear every day. I am not for knocking ones free speech, but this guy is dangerous.
    ************************

    Dramatic, NOT dangerous. Come on now, let’s be careful, your sounding like Botoxnan.

  69. Amen wbb
    **************

    1. Legislating From The Bench: typically this means a judge ignores the literal language of the statute, the regulation or the Constitution, and substitutes their own judgment in its stead and place. Liberal judges are more inclined to do this than conservatives. Why? Because true conservative judges consider themselves bound by the original intent of the Constitution, whereas liberal judges tend to see the Constitution as a document which must be updated with the times, which entails the creation of new rights and remedies never envisioned by the framers.

  70. confloyd
    April 12th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
    I couldn’t of thought anything worse than bury Hillary is the supreme court. I think it might be a black woman…which would be great! We need more women and an AA liberal would be good.
    **************
    That would be a nightmare. Think Mo Zilla and you have a liberal black female. No thanks, work with way too many of them and call me racist, but if you want an extremely activist pro gov handout sort…that would fit the want adds.

  71. hennie1
    April 12th, 2010 at 2:44 pm
    Those damn Republicans. They screwed up their own party, and now feel the need to screw ours up too.
    *****************

    I believe the Dem’s screwed up our party just fine by themselves…not my party anymore

  72. Gonzotex, I didn’t say I wanted one, I said I thought he was going to pick one…LOL! I hope whoever it is it will be that will read and rule on the constitution and not politics.

  73. Gonzo, I think Glenn’s days are numbered on the air, his own company is the sponsor for most of his show now…the liberals are running him off…I did not have a problem with him until he started putting Hillary in the same box as the fraud!

  74. I remember Raygun too, do you remember when he came out and said that catsup was considered a vegetable in the school lunch menu? Now all the kids are fat, the republicans don’t want to pay for the insurance, but it was Raygun who first screwed up the school lunch program..do you remember that?

  75. Whoever it was, Hillary nailed his ass to the carpet, LOL!! She loves to get those guys! THis guy had two daughters and they were fighting about abortion or birth control. I don’t remember. It was a young guy though! THese guys were’nt around for the backstreet abortion business that took out so many young women and the guys got off scott free for the exception most of them went to Vietnam.

  76. I’m not surprised Orrin Hatch praised Hillary as a potential pick for SCOTUS. He respects her immensely. But I always knew it was a baseless rumor. She should stay as SOS, anyway.

  77. Paula, I am glad you did, it scared the crap out of me…at least some republicans realize she’s a gem. Now the rest of the party should take the lesson, they wouldn’t have to worry so much about the teaparties, they’d have Hillary’s 18 million. Fox had Mittens on again, gee, why don’t they let someone else talk for a change.

  78. confloyd
    April 12th, 2010 at 8:22 pm
    ******************

    Funny thing, it is now actually considered a veg..he was right after all. Too much sodium however to be healthy.

  79. Gonzotex, It might be a vegetable, but how nutrious is it. I know he cut fresh vege’s to give the kids catsup, that can’t be good. When I was a kid the cafeteria folks actually cooked, they did not give the kids pre packed food.

  80. “I declared that catsup be legally considered a vegetable in public school lunches!”

    ~ Ronald Reagan’s Ghost

  81. Shadowfox:

    Thanks for posting Will Bower’s article in Huffington Post. I stopped going to that website a couple of years ago. It is refreshing to see Will Bower’s article in that.

  82. I fully abhor the Obot tactics but realistically, the Rethugs do the same thing. Florida in 2000, including sending operatives to create havoc outside the recount room, was obviously coversive.

    The Tea Party started out as a true grassroots effort, but now has been co-opted by the GOP and FOX News. Palin quits in AL and becomes the next “celebrity” pied-piper candidate? She talks Tea Party but supports Perry in the TX primaries. So, how is she any different?

    We are unfortunately facing nothing more than 3-card monte politics. The system is a fraud.

    Glenn Beck is no savior. He is making big bucks with his store and rantings and you can’t tell me he has an agenda that goes beyond “information.” He’s working at FOX, after all.

    At my age, I find it no longer an option to enable any of these people by “choosing the lesser of two evils.”
    Uri Brofenbrenner once discussed the validity of not voting, that it does send a message. Of course, no one is listening to any “messages” coming from voters/citizens anymore! So, even if I don’t vote and that is fruitless in terms of sending a message, at least I save gas and don’t waste my time…

  83. wbboei

    I know Will Bower and have posted at his blog. He is spot on with that letter.
    ———
    I met him in Denver and he is one awesome guy, true blue Hillary supporter.

  84. #
    gonzotx
    April 12th, 2010 at 7:58 pm

    wbboei
    April 12th, 2010 at 7:46 pm
    ***********

    Wasn’t he a Puma?
    ———–
    Yes, Will is a PUMA…he was part of the Just Say No Deal blog…here is a video of Will talking about PUMAs.

  85. insightanalytical, I hear you. I voted for Medina because she was sincere. Did I go along with all she thought she could accomplish if elected as Gov…NO…but she was real…not some prefabricated piece of work bought and made by the globalists.

  86. I have many reasons to not trust them, I have new reasons not to trust the Dems. I have no party.

    I like not having a party. I can vote to throw the bums out and then vote to throw the new bums out next time. I figure that, if we keep going up the side of their heads with a two by four enough times, sooner or later some of them are going to get the message.

  87. hwc, I can blame Ronnie for anything I like, its not like he can defend himself…just kidding! I was making a job about the catsup, although its a true statement. He did make catsup in public schools a vege…its a matter of history.

  88. Wasn’t he a Puma?
    ———————
    Very definitely Gonzo. I see Shadowfax answered you, but I wanted to second the motion.

  89. Shadowfax: do you trust that website? Project Vote Smart: The Voters Self Defense System (my ass)

    If what we see on Ryan is a complete and accurate summary of his voting record, then I do not like him.

    But if you search that same website for Pelosi what do you suppose you get?

    A puff piece with a beaming photo of this candidate which stresses the health care legislation only, her speeches and the fact that she has received an A from the teachers union and 100 from a Human Rights organization. Nothing whatsoever about her 11% rating, and the other issues which hang around her neck like an albatross. It has a link to other legislation but it is not presented in the run on narrative style of the Ryan piece.

    Consequently, I am inclined to believe that this is an uber partisan website. That being the case I think it is important to verify their assessment of Ryan through an independent source. Also, the legislation catch line is often a euphemism which does not reflect the content or the real issue.

    See for yourself: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=26344

  90. Does anyone know anything about this Roy Blunt a congressman from Missouri???

    I am going to do some more research on Ryan. I might like him better than Rubio.

  91. Does anyone know anything about this Roy Blunt a congressman from Missouri???
    ———————
    I will get to that in a minute.

  92. Here the link to that site. On the surface it appears legit. It was founded by bi partisan interests. The guy running it however appears to be a partisan. And he is unhappy with Ryan because he would not play ball with him on his so called courage test. The guys name is Richard Kimbal–no relation to David Jansen.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Vote_Smart

  93. Concerning Roy Blount. He is a tough politician. He was House Whip and served under Boehner. They competed for the Speaker job. My issue with Blount was he was on the opposing side of a transaction I was working on which was opposed by UPS. Blount’s son worked for UPS as a lobbyist. Thus we expected he would intervene on their side, but he did not. You may want to see what Vote Smart says about him. Not that I trust their judgment.

  94. Ketchup is not considered a reimbursable vegetable for low-income subsidized lunches. It’s a condiment. That was a proposal that the Reagan admin believed would save a billion dollars, but when reported on by Newsweek the public rejected the idea and it was never passed.

  95. I sure got you all going on that Ketsup thing, LOL! I never liked Reagan, I had to live thru his policies in which I had to stand in cheese/rice/beans lines for several months while the oil industry went to hell. So like Reagan I don’t.

    Here is a article I just read on Yahoo. I guess this is going to help…I am not sure..check it out.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_us_china

  96. I just read an article that states Roy Blunt thought the insurance companies shouldn’t have to cover pre existing conditions…so I don’t know…I do think I might like Paul Ryan…he is easy on the eyes and is really smart. I am trying to find out if he was the one that made such an ass of himself at Hillary’s confirmation hearing…It was a young man with two daughters…so I don’t know.
    I am not sure about Rubio…but one thing I don’t want to do anymore is have a Rep. congress and senate and a rep. Potus…its happened twice in a row and it is just not good!

  97. I watched Rubio the other morning on TV and I was unimpressed..he stumbled with the questions of which I can’t remember…everytime I have heard Paul Ryan he was like the male version of Hillary with the answers…So unless he turns out to be a male chauvanist and a total Bible thumper I might like him to run.

    If Mittens had said that about Hillary the other morning, I was really trying to open my mind to him, but everytime he starts with the CDS. I hate that…when a noteable republican like Orin Hatch says nice things about Hillary…it tells me the whole party pretty much knows she is smart, trustworthy and a threat.

  98. wbboei
    April 13th, 2010 at 12:47 am

    Shadowfax: do you trust that website? Project Vote Smart: The Voters Self Defense System (my ass)
    ———–
    You could be correct, I only glanced at the website listings for Ryan and see at the top his voting against abortion on many instances, so I suspected it was correct. Nasty was a very liberal Dem for most of her career, and went nuts since throwing Hillary under the bus………….so, not sure which is the best website to check on. If I find a better site tomorrow I will post it.
    There was a site on PUMApac many used, I will look for it.

  99. Leahy is a pathetic creature. Used to use Brylcream. Now used Brasso. Deadhead to the end. He is whining about judicial activism. He is a whiner by nature. The issue de jour is health chare reform. He is worried to death that the Roberts Court will strike down the unconstitutional individual mandate.

    Bambi’s minions are whispering about appointing someone who can be as influential as Roberts. They forget Roberts will still e chief justice. Seems they have in mind a particular beltway lawyer they like who they hope can match wits with Roberts. Jamie Goerelick who had her own problems vouches for him. The justice whom this alleged appointee will need to match wits with is Scalia. You may not like his decisions, but he is the real force to be reckoned with. The guy they have in mind is not of that intellectual calibre, but few are.

  100. If I find a better site tomorrow I will post it.
    There was a site on PUMApac many used, I will look for it.
    ——————————–
    The one I used to use and recommend was The Almanac of American Politics. Michael Barone then of US News was the co-editor. The book is excellent but pricy. The on line version is excellent but pricey. If you can find a free site which is neutral that would be best.

  101. “You might be right, but then again, the Repugs might be as bad as they have always been.”

    They haven’t always been as bad as Bush. Prior Repub administrations have a lot to speak for, even if I never voted for them. I don’t fear a true Hitler type emerging from the Republicans. I do see Obama and his Socialist Nutroots clearing the path for a true Stalin type.

    I mean, nobody in the Bush administration ever actually said Hitler was their hero. Obama appointed self-avowed Communists and Mao worshippers, and he emboldens Socialists.

  102. Really, Confloyd? Paul Ryan? You have got to be kidding me…This is from his wiki page:

    On April 1, 2009, Ryan introduced the GOP Alternative to the 2010 United States federal budget. This proposed alternative would have eliminated the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, lowered the top tax rate to 25%, introduced an 8.5% value-added consumption tax, and imposed a five-year spending freeze on all discretionary spending.[10] It would also have replaced the Medicare system.[11] Instead, it proposed that starting in 2021, the federal government would pay part of the cost of private medical insurance for individuals turning 65.[11] Ryan’s proposed budget would also have allowed taxpayers to opt out of the federal income taxation system with itemized deductions, and instead pay a flat 10 percent of adjusted gross income up to $100,000 and 25 percent on any remaining income.[12] Ryan’s proposed budget was heavily criticized by opponents for the lack of concrete numbers[13]. It was ultimately rejected in the house by a vote of 293-137, with 38 Republicans in opposition.[14]

    In late January 2010, Ryan released a new version of his “Roadmap.”[15] It would give across the board tax cuts by reducing income tax rates; eliminating income taxes on capital gains, dividends, and interest; and abolishing the corporate income tax, the estate tax, and the alternative minimum tax. The plan would privatize a portion of Social Security,[16][17] eliminate the tax exclusion for employer-sponsored health insurance,[17] end traditional Medicare and most of Medicaid,[16][17] and terminate the Children’s Health Insurance Program. The plan would replace these health programs with a system of vouchers whose value would decrease over time.[17]

    This guy is about as far right as it gets. Not sure why you feel he would stand up for your interests, unless you no longer desire Medicare, want to see SS privatized, think the wealthy pay far too much in taxes, and would like to start paying a heavy VAT tax.

  103. mj, All I said I wanted to look him up and see what he stood for…and thanks to you I have. I said previously that I had to make sure he wasn’t a RWN or a nutcase, but I like the flat tax idea, but of coarse nobody better be talking about screwing with social security.

    I can tell you mj, its going to happen whether we like it or not…Glenn Beck all week long is going to set the stage for what I believe is going to happen. The rethugs for years wanted to get rid of social security, and they are going to do it by hook or crook.

  104. Sometimes I think you might be better off to watch a little of Beck because his ideas are the ideas being promoted by the right…they are scary as hell. He is advocating for a complete depression…and believe me I think it may be down the road soon.

    DId you see Obama and the Chinese have worked something out on the currency, I don’t know how its going to come down, but I think we are going to know pretty soon.

  105. You like a flat tax? Uh, why? Why do you think that works for you? Most states have flat taxes which is why most Americans pay very low federal taxes, to make up for the regressive flat state taxes. Yes, of course, Glen Beck would love to see SS privatized. I think Obama probably wouldn’t mind some means testing or privatization of SS. But ultimately I think the public will reject any such endeavors. It is pretty sad though. There is no Party protecting the middle class anymore. We have to do it ourselves. But I am not as fatalistic as you. I think we can.

    My point,c onfloyd, is just because the Bill Bradley wing took over the Democratic Party, doesn’t mean any wing of the Republican Party has swept into fill the void. Looking for Republicans to protect the middle class, is like looking for the foxes to protect the hen house. You are not going to find either Party protecting the basic principles of the FDR coalition Party today. You WILL NOT.

  106. confloyd
    April 13th, 2010 at 3:33 am

    Sometimes I think you might be better off to watch a little of Beck because his ideas are the ideas being promoted by the right…they are scary as hell. He is advocating for a complete depression…and believe me I think it may be down the road soon.

    —-

    I don’t think there will be any depression. Indeed, the markets are up. I think sadly though, the only restructuring done to the American economy is more jobs were lost that will never come back. I don’t think incentives in the finance secotr were changes at all, and that is truly sad.

    —-

    DId you see Obama and the Chinese have worked something out on the currency, I don’t know how its going to come down, but I think we are going to know pretty soon.

    —-

    We’ll see. After his coddling of the Chinese I can not imagine we got a very good deal, but with Hillary working on this who knows?

  107. Admin: red state posted a copy of the 1984 video and pointed out that Obama is guilty of the very thing the very thing he falsely accused Hillary doing, i.e. commanding an army of mindless zombies who would follow her orders without question. The only thing I would add is there are a few crass opportunists in that camp as well, starting with corrupt Obama himself. They incorrectly assume a lone gunman but others know better. This elicited three comments. The first was by an idiot named red neck hippy and is not worth noting. The remaining two however are interesting.
    ——————————————————————————-
    clintonformccain Tuesday, April 13th at 12:28AM EDT

    That ad was not made by an “individual”. It was made by Blue State Digital, who was Obama’s website company. The “fired” the “employee” who “created” the ad, notwithstanding that he was roommates with one of Obama’s communications hacks.

    This was the official kickoff to the Obama campaign. A lot of us saw what kind of character he was early on.

    I cannot stress enough how large and angry a large slice of fomer Democrats is with their old party, the attacks on women, the rigging of the nominating process, and so on and so forth.

    There’s an opportunity for Republicans here. This dynamic was not insignificant in the recent Massachusetts Senate race — a state that voted strongly for Clinton and where voters were given the bird by the elected officials.

    Log in to Reply

    A WOMAN getting smashed in the face
    tominkorea Monday, April 12th at 10:53PM EDT

    It needs to be pointed out that it was a woman getting smashed in the face with a hammer. Maybe the liberal trolls reading will call that impolite, but it’s to be true and should be mentioned.

  108. mj
    April 12th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
    Sarah Palin is a conservative politician. On the issues, she is not very close to a Hillary Clinton.
    [….]
    I personally do not understand the need some have to feel good about the Republicans in order to cast a protest vote, but to each their own, I guess.

    ==================

    Touche. ;-/

    I’m dubious about some of the things Palin has been doing lately. However, she doesn’t have to follow Hillary on the issues, to be a good choice.

    They are offering different things. In Alaska Palin did reform, really cut taxes, tamed the oil companies. If we can’t have Hillary’s policies, at least a Palin clean-up would be worthwhile. (Imagine Palin taking on the insurance and drug companies!)

  109. InsightAnalytical
    April 12th, 2010 at 9:11 pm

    ===================

    Non-voting doesn’t send much of a message. If you don’t want to actually influence an election, voting third party sends a clear message.

  110. “Imagine Palin taking on the insurance and drug companies!” Has she expressed any desire at all to do so? Cutting taxes means very little to me, as in my lifetime, I’ve seen the wide spread use of fees as a means to make up revenue lost in tax cuts. With the exception of Bill Clinton’s tax policies in the 1990’s when he raised taxes on wealthy Americans, tax cuts have meant a degradation of services that has not been materially worth it for most Americans, IMO. One thing about Alaska is that each resident gets a dividend of the oil revenue, we could have the same for carbon taxes(an idea suggested by Robert Reich). Carbon taxes could be collected but the revenue from such taxes could be divided evenly into dividends for every American. Why isn’t Palin suggesting something like that? If it’s good enough for Alaska…No, I think we all wish any of these pols would actually want to represent the middle class over the moneyed interests but thus far none of the prominent politicians in either Party are making any noises they intend to do so. It’s pathetic. Our expectations are so low we keep looking to make any one of these people a person who will champion the middle class, but I do not see it. Certainly the Bill Bradley coalition that took over the Democratic Party has been a disaster for us, and they must go, but I don’t think any phoenix has risen from the ashes of the Republican Party that gives a crap about the middle class. Right now, the vast majority of Americans simply don’t have representation in the government. Our only hope is to keep throwing the bums out until something worthwhile emerges.

  111. Palin DID something in Alaska. Actually several things, which did benefit the middle classes. She did stand up to the most powerful corporations — which in Alaska were the oil companies.

    If a President Palin even did to the oil companies nationally what she did to the Alaska oil companies, that would be worthwhile!

    I don’t know whether she has talked about the insurance and drug companies. She was in favor of us being able to buy insurance across state lines, thus more competition. (Axelrod said that would be “too disruptive”!)

    Now here is a far-out idea. Palin is sincerely anti-abortion but approaches the issue by contraception! Imo what we need are better contraceptives, which Palin might go after the drug companies to produce.

  112. Well, I’m sorry, I actually don’t think Palin did much ground breaking in Alaska. I don’t really care if she’s pro-contraception. I don’t think abortion is the big issue facing the lives of most Americans.

    I think Palin is a clever politician, and good for her. But, I don’t think she’s proposed much in the way of helping the middle class.

    “She was in favor of us being able to buy insurance across state lines, thus more competition.” Yeah, I think that’s pretty dumb and like a gimmick. I don’t think competition works in insurance markets. In fact, I think private health insurance markets have already been a big market failure, hence the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans.

    No, I support the notion of kicking out the Bill Bradley coalition, but I don’t kid myself that anyone has emerged who actually really wants to combat the moneyed interests running the country. Would be nice if someone would, but I suspect that won’t happen until several cycles of throwing the bums out has passed. The pols just know that at this point they don’t need to. People are ready to take anything as a sign of what champions of the middle class they are.

  113. Turndown, I am aware of her record. I’m not awfully impressed, but I can’t think of a modern politician, excluding Bill and Hillary Clinton, who impress me. No, it’s fine for those who see Palin as a hero for the middle class, or closest to, or Paul Ryan, or Barack Obama for that matter. I just don’t share the view. My clear eyed view is there are no heroes here. I accept there are no heroes in modern day American politics. No Teddy Roosevelt’s. No FDR’s. Not even an LBJ or a Bill Clinton. I find it all so fake. We have a bunch of pols who profess to understand the depth of the demise of the middle class, yet don’t want to upset the donor class too much. People are free to support whomever they want, and believe you me I wish a Palin would really find her inner Teddy Roosevelt. For that matter, I would have liked for Obama to have found an FDR core. But the latter is a lost cause and the former certainly has not happened yet. I guess, I’ve just accepted that there are no heroes here. I’d like to see the Bill Bradley wing of the Democratic Party destroyed, but beyond that my expectations are limited.

  114. Turndown: I agree with your comments. You are thinking strategically. The dimocratic party must be destroyed if the democratic party is to be resurrected. It is as simple as that. During World War II the United States joined forces with the Soviet Union to defeat Hitler. That did not mean that we accepted their political system, nor did we ultimately succumb to it just because we joined forces. We could have refused to join with them because we found their political system abhorrent but in that case we could have lost the larger war. That is why a temporary marriage of convenience with the Republicans to defeat Obama is far better than sitting on the sidelines, or worse yet joining forces with Hitler. This is RealPolitic 101. Basic stuff.

  115. Job Killer Obama

    Print Share – + April 12, 2010 | 6:00 AM ET
    Tax Week: Obama Plans Tax Increases on Investment Income

    This week, millions of Americans will be sending their tax returns to Washington. But no matter how much revenue the government takes in, one thing is certain, it won’t be enough to cover all the plans for federal spending, which will more than double the U.S. debt over the next decade.

    Doug Holtz Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office says ” the projected debt is enormous, you know the next 10 years we see the debt rise to $20 trillion.”

    No one believes that is sustainable. But to stay even at those levels, the administration’s counting on a doubling of federal revenues in the next decade – the first big chunk of which comes at the end of this year – when President Obama will let part of the Bush tax cuts expire, but reinstate others.

    Bob Greenstein of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says “given the serious longer term fiscal problems the country faces, we just can’t afford to continue the tax cuts for the people at the very top.”

    And Michael Linden, director for tax policy at the Center for American Progress, a Democratic think tank, says, “it’s equity…but it’s also about responsibility. We have a big problem that we are facing in this country in terms of a large budget gap going forward. And I believe that the wealthy in the country have the responsibility to help solve that problem.”

    In an effort to raise revenues, the president intends to raise the tax rates rise for singles making more than $200,000 a year, and couples making more than $250,000. Greenstein says this will bring in $826 billion over the next 10 years.

    But critics say the only way revenues really increase is by expanding the overall economy. They argue tax increases, especially those on investment income that Obama wants, will do just the opposite.

    Alan Reynolds of the CATO Institute, a libertarian think tank, says “we need to focus more on getting the tax base to grow – meaning wages and profits to grow – than on trying to punish people for earning too much money.”

    President Obama plans on pushing the capital gains tax rate from 15 to 20 percent.

    The health care reform bill adds on top of that a new 3.8 percent Medicare surtax on all investment income, including dividends.

    Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation says “any time the government raises taxes on savings and investments like they are with this new Medicare tax, you’re going to have less savings and investment.”

    And many argue that’s the exact opposite of how best to raise revenues. Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush all lowered taxes on investment gains, which paid dividends to the government as well as investors.

    Richard Vigilante, co-author of “Panic: The Betrayal of Capitalism by Wall Street and Washington,” says the record is clear. “Every single time we’ve cut capital gains taxes, the revenue from capital gains taxes has gone up, not down. Because you get more investment, stock prices go up, bond prices go up, and as those things go up, the government collects more capital gains tax revenue.”

    Analysts cite numerous examples. Brian Riedl of the Heritage Foundation points to the 2003 cuts under President Bush at a time when the economy was struggling.

    “In the six quarters after those tax cuts,” he says, “investment surged, the economic growth rate doubled and the stock market jumped 33 percent. When we cut tax rates on working, saving and investing we get more working, saving and investing.”

    Nevertheless, those who favor some increases, even on investment income, say the wealthy can afford it and the middle class and below cannot.

    Bob Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says “when you give a tax cut to someone who lives paycheck to paycheck they spend most of it. But when you give a tax cut to somebody who has extremely high income who already has more income than they can spend, then most of the tax cut is saved.”

    Critics of such increases respond by saying the rich don’t just leave their money lying around to gather dust – they put it to good use.

    Donald Rehr, a professor at George Washington University, argues “the wealthy invest that money in publicly held companies in private firms in entrepreneurs – which create more jobs, create more products and create more service and create more wealthy.”

    “So it’s not like they go home to their big mansion every day,” he says, “and look at their pile of money on the floor and say, ‘hey let’s count it again just for fun.’ They don’t do that. They invest it.”

    And Vigilante makes an even broader case for low capital gains taxes, saying they expand the economy in unforeseen ways, such as capital gains reductions under Presidents Carter and Reagan, which gave a boost to the tech sector in the early days of the computer chip.

    “The microprocessor was seven years old when Jimmy Carter cut the capital gains taxes radically for the first time, and [in] the tech sector, all our high tech productivity exploded as a result,” Vigilante said.

    “Here’s a really great fact of history. Jimmy Carter’s and Ronald Reagan’s cuts in capital gains taxes drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan. Because what drove the Soviets out of Afghanistan was Stinger missiles, and without the tech sector, the Stinger missile wouldn’t have been possible,” he added.

    Most acknowledge there is a limit to how high capital gains can be pushed without slowing economic growth.

    But supporters of the increases that Obama is proposing say he isn’t even close.

    Greenstein notes Obama is proposing rates that are “actually lower, much lower than the capital gains rate under Ronald Reagan’s tax reform proposals.”

    And Linden says “the top marginal rate on capital gains is at the lowest point it’s been since 1933.”

    I don’t see any real argument, he says, that that rate could not stand to go a little higher, especially for people making 200 or 250 thousand dollars.”

    This has been one of the most enduring political debates in American politics–how much can the rich be taxed without hurting the economy, and therefore the non-rich as well.

    Obama is going to open a new chapter in that debate as he raises taxes on investment just as the economy struggles to recover from a nasty economic downturn

  116. I’ve quickly scanned comments upthread about the site http://www.votesmart.org, and have a caution. It should not be confused with a similar site name, http://www.smartvoter.org, which The League of Women Voters sponsors. I’ve not yet spent much time at the latter site, but am most impressed that, given a street address and a zip code, it will produce a ballot for the election date which you can choose. It is a nation-wide venue, so it is easy to learn when state primaries will be held. It invites candidates to post their own biographies.
    That is as much as I’ve seen there to date. I’ve asked my daughters and granddaughters to bookmark the site.

  117. According to Daniel Webster and subsequently Chief Justice John Marshall “the power to tax is the power to destroy”. When you tax investment income, which would be reinvested in the economy to create jobs, you destroy that economy and the potential for job growth. That is what the dims plan to do, and make all of us poorer in the process. At the same time, he is running record deficits. If his stated goal was to bankrupt the country he could not do a better job of it than he is doing now. And without new jobs less and less people will be paying taxes. Obama is touching off a vicious cycle which in time will drag everyone down with no exceptions. The economy should be an expanding pie, but he is making it a zero sum game.

  118. DId you see Obama and the Chinese have worked something out on the currency, I don’t know how its going to come down, but I think we are going to know pretty soon.
    ————————————————-

    This article in today’s National Journal answers the question. It is a headline. And that is about all it is. It will not help our economy, which he is burying under a mountain of debt. Obama is being gang raped–as usual abroad and he is taking it out on the people at home.

    Much Ado (About Nothing)?
    Monday, April 12, 2010

    China finally appears on the brink of allowing its currency’s value to rise, as the United States has been urging. The big question is what impact it will have — in reducing the U.S. trade deficit, boosting sales of U.S. exports to China and “bringing back” U.S. jobs. The answer: not much.

    Although the currency question has been a hot-button issue in Congress and the administration, many Asia-watchers say conditions in China have changed so much in recent years that America isn’t likely to get the kind of bang from a rising yuan that politicians have been assuming.

    “We’ve been fighting the last war” in pursuing the currency issue, says Harald B. Malmgren, a former senior U.S. trade official who keeps close tabs on what’s happening in Asia. “Circumstances are changing,” and the yuan’s value isn’t as important as it was a few years ago, he says. “We’re arguing about a war that is over.”

    Jim O’Neill, chief economist for Goldman Sachs, agrees. “It is not obvious to some of us why Congress is so excitable about this issue,” he wrote recently in the Financial Times. The United States has plenty of sensitive issues to worry about in U.S.-China relations, O’Neill points out. This isn’t one of them, he says.

    To be sure, it’s easy to see why U.S. lawmakers so often seize on the currency issue when they feel pressed to “do something” to retaliate against China. Labor has been riding the issue for years, arguing it would help create U.S. jobs. It’s simple — and wins votes. More effective steps are harder to explain.

    Almost everyone agrees China has unfairly kept its currency undervalued. Except for a brief period — mid-2005 to mid-2008 — Beijing has pegged the yuan to the U.S. dollar, and it intervenes heavily in the foreign exchange markets to hold it there. That benefits Chinese exporters, who can sell at lower prices.

    But economists are widely split over how much the yuan’s value should appreciate to “level the playing field.” The estimates run from a modest rise to as much as 40 percent. And assessments of what impact that might have on the U.S. and other industrial economies are almost as wide-ranging as the numbers.

    As a result, analysts caution that once China allows the yuan to rise, the euphoria may prove short-lived. First, any liberalization of China’s exchange-rate policies is likely to provide for a modest, gradual appreciation of the yuan — not a great leap upward. Second, it may take years for benefits to show up.

    “The potential short-term benefits to the United States … are distinctly limited,” says Philip I. Levy, a trade specialist at the American Enterprise Institute. Some of the more radical solutions would hurt the United States “while proving ineffective” in getting China to change.

    Malmgren’s arguments are convincing. Would a higher-valued yuan help reduce the U.S. trade deficit? Unlikely, he says. U.S. consumers already have cut back because of the recession, and Chinese goods show up in so many staples that somewhat higher prices, from a currency shift, wouldn’t likely cut sales much.

    Would U.S. exports to China suddenly surge if the yuan’s value increases? Probably not. Before the recession, China already had become America’s fastest-growing export market, and its largest after Canada and Mexico. U.S. exports to China held steady through 2009, despite the recession.

    China’s global trade surplus already has shrunk sharply — even though the yuan has been held steady — because the recession has reduced demand worldwide. China’s export industries have suffered. Layoffs have soared. And global demand seems likely to remain weak for months.

    Will letting the yuan’s value rise “bring back” the jobs labor says China stole? No chance, Malmgren says. U.S. firms that can’t obtain low-cost goods from China will turn to lower-wage countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia. Indeed, they already have begun to do so — because Chinese wages are rising.

    Ask those who actually trade with China, and you’ll get a litany of complaints that really do need attention. Doing business in China is fraught with uncertainty. Laws often are applied arbitrarily. Technology is stolen, with impunity. Hackers penetrate foreign firms’ computer systems without fear.

    An annual survey of companies doing business in China compiled by the American Chamber of Commerce in Beijing cites many of these same problems, but barely mentions the exchange-rate question. “It’s never been one of the top concerns,” says Christian Murck, the organization’s president.

    Indeed, some analysts say China already had begun considering allowing the yuan to appreciate for the same reason it did in 2005 — to help cool inflation at home, which has become a serious problem in the face of China’s rapid growth. The yuan’s value rose some 20 percent between 2005 and 2008, with little real impact.

    As such, critics argue Congress’s latest frenzy over the exchange rate only delayed any decision to let the yuan resume its rise. Even more than many other governments, Beijing is reluctant to be seen bending to the will of a foreign country, especially when those demands are likely to cause pain at home.

    by Art Pine

  119. I am sitting here a 3;30 in the morning wondering who the biggest asshole is at Politico. There are so many to choose from that you really need to develop a refined set of criteria. After giving the question far more attention than it deserves I have decided that Rat boy Todd gets the academy award for most disingenuous bootlicker, and Ben Smith gets the academy award for the dumbest oaf in the shop. And I am pleased to say both of them did it the old fashioned way: they earned it.

  120. Iam att Hillarys schedule for today and it is t
    he reason Otrauma cannot fire her or slhelve her in SCOTUS.He needs her to sustain his administration and avoid questions that he cnnot answer.Run and hide Otrauma your days are numbered.

    ————————————————-

    Daily appointments Schedule for April 13, 2010

    Washington, DC

    April 13, 2010

    ——————————————————————————–

    SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON

    8:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Singaporean Prime Minister Hsien Loong Lee, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    9:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Algerian Foreign Minister Mourad Medelci, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    9:30 a.m. Secretary Clinton attends the Morning Plenary Session of the Nuclear Security Summit Chaired by President Obama, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)

    10:00 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    10:45 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    11:15 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Moroccan Foreign Minister Taieb Fassi-Fihri, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    11:40 a.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Thai Foreign Minister Kasit, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    12:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu host a Working Lunch for Nuclear Security Summit Delegation Members, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    1:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton signs the Plutonium Disposition Protocol With Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)
    The signing ceremony will be open to media with Nuclear Security Summit Credentials. Media must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, by 12:45 p.m.

    2:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton attends the Afternoon Plenary Session of the Nuclear Security Summit Chaired by President Obama, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)

    2:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Chilean Foreign Minister Moreno, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    3:15 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Brazilian Foreign Minister Amorim, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    4:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Vietnamese Prime Minister Dung, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    4:45 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Armenian President Sargsian, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start.

    5:30 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with British Foreign Minister David Miliband, at the Washington Convention Center.
    (POOLED CAMERA SPRAY)
    Media holding pool passes for the bilateral meeting must be assembled in the Press Hold Room, Room 140, 30 minutes prior to the event start..

    7:00 p.m. Secretary Clinton holds a Bilateral Meeting with Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani, at the Four Seasons Hotel.
    (

  121. The FOX’s DEN is open 24/7 and it’s Heyenas maintain the drumbeat of shaping the news their way ‘Flair and unbalanced.They have hung Otrauma up like a pig on a sausage farm and will continue to yoy with him while keeping Hillary in the negative atmosphere to destroy her chances of ever being POTUS
    This evil Den of ratings crazy traitors should have a motto that is more befitting their agenda.

    How about “FOX RATINGS FIRST-COUNTRY LAST”

  122. Latest polls show former state senator and casino executive Sue Lowden pulling ahead of party rival Danny Tarkanian in the Nevada primary, the third party candidate failing to siphon off enough votes to alter the general election, unions no longer able to deliver an election, and Sue winning the general election over the corrupt and gaff prone meatball– Harry Reid/

    http://www.lvrj.com/news/lowden-leads-republican-pack-90559809.htm

  123. I have a friend in Teas who knows one of the key people on the Oprah Winfrey show who assures us that when the cameras are off she is a screaming racist. This book is a valuable contribution to piercing the publicity veil of this disreputable woman and letting the world know who she really is. Also N.B. this is the kind of person the big media elites from NYT to ABC choose to protect while they ravage tea parties.
    —————————————————-
    New biography reveals Oprah’s ‘hidden’ life
    Lesbian flings, prostitution & abuse lies
    By JEREMY OLSHAN

    Oprah Winfrey — who built a billion-dollar empire persuading everyone from celebs to average Joes to reveal the truth about themselves — is a big phony when it comes to her own past, an explosive new book charges.
    Winfrey’s relationship with longtime “love” Stedman Graham, her reputed dirt-poor upbringing in rural Mississippi, her rumored lesbian crushes on women such as Diane Sawyer — all are stories she has manipulated for decades in the name of sensational ratings, according to writer Kitty Kelley’s latest unauthorized biography “Oprah.”

    The much-anticipated book details how:

    * Winfrey concocted stories about sexual abuse she suffered as a child — and grossly exaggerated the poverty she was brought up in.

    * She went to great lengths to conceal her “lesbian affairs” — including hefty payoffs — and publicly attached herself to Graham to appear more normal to her audience of housewives.

    * She lavished romantic gifts — including a diamond toe ring — on ABC talking head Diane Sawyer.

    * Winfrey sold her body to earn extra money and has even described herself as a teen “prostitute.”

    * She doesn’t know the true identity of her biological father.

    * Her relationship with her own mother is so cold that Winfrey won’t even let the older woman have her phone number.

    Winfrey was born in Kosciusko, Miss., in 1954, and, the way she likes to tell it, she was so impoverished that she never had any new dresses or dolls and had to adopt two cockroaches as pets, naming them Melinda and Sandy.
    But her family says that’s nonsense.

    She may not have been well off, but Oprah was relatively “spoiled” as a little girl, her cousin said.

    “Where Oprah got that nonsense about growing up in filth and roaches I have no idea,” said the relative, Katherine Carr Esters. “I’ve confronted her and asked, ‘Why do you tell such lies?’ Oprah told me, ‘That’s what people want to hear. The truth is boring.’ ”

    A friend of Esters added that the manipulation of her past is a key to her success.

    “Every move is calculated to further her brand and lift her image, which is why she does good works,” Jewette Battles said.
    As a teen, Winfrey was a wild child, promiscuous to the point of prostitution, her relatives said.

    The future star would steal from her mother’s purse, pawn her jewelry and even turn tricks. She was eventually sent to live in Nashville with Vernon Winfrey, who was her mother’s former lover and who is listed on her birth certificate as her father. He has been described as the domineering disciplinarian who set her straight.

    Later, determined to become rich and famous, Winfrey was ready to change her story to her advantage, making sure she cultivated her image as an everywoman, the book alleges.

    That meant she had to quell rumors about her sexuality.

    At one point, the rumors included seamy talk at ABC about a relationship between Winfrey and Sawyer when Oprah worked there.
    Employees there described “giggly late-night phone calls” and a series of lavish gifts from Winfrey — including gigantic sprays of orchids and a 1-carat diamond toe ring — to Sawyer.

    Despite such rumors, Kelley concludes Winfrey is “asexual.”

    GETTY IMAGES
    CROCK-SHOW HOSTESS: Oprah Winfrey with her stepfather, Vernon (left), who, according to a salacious new unauthorized biography, claims the talk-show queen has no love for so-called boyfriend Stedman Graham and her BFF, Gayle King, whom the dad calls a “dirt hog”.

    Still, she quotes sources describing how, in 1989, Winfrey was insistent on paying Tim Watts, an ex-boyfriend, $50,000 to keep quiet about her lesbian affairs and the fact that her brother, who died of AIDS, was gay.

    “He said she did not want him to talk about her brother being gay,” said Judy Lee Colteryahn, who also dated Watts.
    “It’s no big deal to have a brother who is homosexual, but apparently it was to Oprah. Tim also said he knew about some lesbian affairs.”

    As for Winfrey’s very public relationship with Graham, the pair do not even share a bedroom, according to the book.
    Landscape architect James van Sweden of Oehme, who spent years working for the couple, said he planned to design a space for a wedding in front of their new estate but knew immediately after watching them together that there would never be a wedding.

    “Oprah keeps Stedman around because she wants her audience to accept her as a normal woman with a man in her life, but from what I saw during those four years, I can tell you there’s nothing there with Stedman. Nothing at all,” he said.
    “He’s simply a fixture in her life,” van Sweden added. “Window-dressing.”

    According to her father, Vernon, Oprah admitted that she was not in love with Stedman.
    “I’m in like . . . not in love,” she told him, according to the book.

    She did reportedly have one affair with a man — “Entertainment Tonight’s” John Tesh, while the two were working in Nashville.

    According to Tesh’s ex, he broke things off because he couldn’t deal with the stigma of being an interracial couple.
    “He said one night he looked down and saw his white body next to her black body and couldn’t take it any more,” the ex said. “He walked out in the middle of the night.”

    Winfrey has played coy on Tesh.

    Vernon Winfrey says he’s been dismayed by how Oprah plays fast and loose with the truth. “She may be admired by the world, but I know the truth,” he says. “So does God and so does Oprah. Two of us remain ashamed.”

    Vernon reserves his harshest words for Winfrey’s best friend, Gayle King, who put the kibosh on a biography he was working on.

    Calling her a “dirt hog” and “street heifer,” he blames King for a rift in his relationship with Oprah.
    “She’s become too close to that woman Gayle,” he says.

    King and others in Oprah’s entourage worked hard to keep a tight grip on employees in order to keep her out of the tabloids.
    “I thought I would be working for the warm and fuzzy person I saw on television,” a former employee at Winfrey’s Harpo production company said. “But, God, I was conned. It’s a cult at Harpo. So oppressive it’s frightening.”

    Perhaps the biggest secret of the book is left a secret.
    Oprah allegedly does not know the true identity of her father.
    Esters told Kelley who he is, on the condition she not publish the information until Winfrey’s mother comes clean to her daughter.

    “And you’ll know when that happens because Oprah will probably have a show on finding your real father,” Esters said. “As I said, the girl wastes nothing.”

    jeremy.olshan@nypost.com

    Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/pulling_back_the_curtain_on_oprah_o8pmz6I4T3lZ8san4GHvlN/1#ixzz0kznExRw4

    Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/pulling_back_the_curtain_on_oprah_o8pmz6I4T3lZ8san4GHvlN#ixzz0kzmmIeYs

  124. #
    wbboei
    April 13th, 2010 at 3:10 am

    If I find a better site tomorrow I will post it.
    There was a site on PUMApac many used, I will look for it.
    ——————————–
    The one I used to use and recommend was The Almanac of American Politics. Michael Barone then of US News was the co-editor. The book is excellent but pricy. The on line version is excellent but pricey. If you can find a free site which is neutral that would be best.
    ———–
    I haven’t read todays posts, but wanted to put this up before I forget…

    Here’s a site that might be better to check on candidates voting record…if they have a record…

    http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r111query.html

  125. OBAMA NEEDS RE-ELECTION TO KEEP HIS FAMILY’S HEALTH PLAN

    Dems: “We had no idea of all the things that we’re in that bill”.

    It is loaded with money quotes:

    1. “The confusion raises the inevitable question: If they did not know exactly what they were doing to themselves, did lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill fully grasp the details of how it would influence the lives of other Americans?”

    2. Apparently the law already needs fixing: “Congress must now decide what steps, if any, it can take to deal with the problem. It could try for a legislative fix, or it could adopt internal policies to minimize any disruptions.”

    3. The language in the law was clear as mud: “In its painstaking analysis of the new law, the research service says the impact on Congress itself and the intent of Congress are difficult to ascertain. [snip] But the research service found that this provision was written in an imprecise, confusing way, so it is not clear when it takes effect.”

    4. They didn’t even put in a basic, assigning a ref: “In addition, the report says, Congress did not designate anyone to resolve these “ambiguities” or to help arrange health insurance for members of Congress in the future.”

    5. Obama needs to keep his day job: “The White House said last month that Mr. Obama would voluntarily participate in the health insurance exchange, though the law does not require him or other administration officials to do so. His participation as president may depend on his getting re-elected in 2012.”

    6. Repubs mock Dems for cluelessness: “Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah, said lawmakers were in the same boat as many Americans, trying to figure out what the new law meant for them. “If members of Congress cannot explain how it’s going to work for them and their staff, how will they explain it to the rest of America?” Mr. Chaffetz asked in an interview.”

    7. Dems snookered by Grassley: The provision governing members of Congress can be traced to the Senate Finance Committee. When the panel was working on the legislation last September, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, proposed an amendment to require that elected federal officials and all federal employees buy coverage through an exchange, ‘rather than using the traditional Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.’ A scaled-back version of the amendment, applying to members of Congress and their aides, was accepted in the committee without objection.”

    Below is the whole article.

    nytimes.com/2010/04/13/us/politics/13health.html

    Baffled by Health Plan? So Are Some Lawmakers
    ========================================

    By ROBERT PEAR
    Published: April 12, 2010

    WASHINGTON — It is often said that the new health care law will affect almost every American in some way. And, perhaps fittingly if unintentionally, no one may be more affected than members of Congress themselves.

    In a new report, the Congressional Research Service says the law may have significant unintended consequences for the “personal health insurance coverage” of senators, representatives and their staff members.

    For example, it says, the law may “remove members of Congress and Congressional staff” from their current coverage, in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, before any alternatives are available.

    The confusion raises the inevitable question: If they did not know exactly what they were doing to themselves, did lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill fully grasp the details of how it would influence the lives of other Americans?

    The law promises that people can keep coverage they like, largely unchanged. For members of Congress and their aides, the federal employees health program offers much to like. But, the report says, the men and women who wrote the law may find that the guarantee of stability does not apply to them.

    “It is unclear whether members of Congress and Congressional staff who are currently participating in F.E.H.B.P. may be able to retain this coverage,” the research service said in an 8,100-word memorandum.

    And even if current members of Congress can stay in the popular program for federal employees, that option will probably not be available to newly elected lawmakers, the report says.

    Moreover, it says, the strictures of the new law will apply to staff members who work in the personal office of a member of Congress. But they may or may not apply to people who work on the staff of Congressional committees and in “leadership offices” like those of the House speaker and the Democratic and Republican leaders and whips in the two chambers.

    These seemingly technical questions will affect 535 members of Congress and thousands of Congressional employees. But the issue also has immense symbolic and political importance. Lawmakers of both parties have repeatedly said their goal is to provide all Americans with access to health insurance as good as what Congress has.

    Congress must now decide what steps, if any, it can take to deal with the problem. It could try for a legislative fix, or it could adopt internal policies to minimize any disruptions.

    In its painstaking analysis of the new law, the research service says the impact on Congress itself and the intent of Congress are difficult to ascertain.

    The law apparently bars members of Congress from the federal employees health program, on the assumption that lawmakers should join many of their constituents in getting coverage through new state-based markets known as insurance exchanges.

    But the research service found that this provision was written in an imprecise, confusing way, so it is not clear when it takes effect.

    The new exchanges do not have to be in operation until 2014. But because of a possible “drafting error,” the report says, Congress did not specify an effective date for the section excluding lawmakers from the existing program.

    Under well-established canons of statutory interpretation, the report said, “a law takes effect on the date of its enactment” unless Congress clearly specifies otherwise. And Congress did not specify any other effective date for this part of the health care law. The law was enacted when President Obama signed it three weeks ago.

    In addition, the report says, Congress did not designate anyone to resolve these “ambiguities” or to help arrange health insurance for members of Congress in the future.

    “This omission, whether intentional or inadvertent, raises questions regarding interpretation and implementation that cannot be definitively resolved by the Congressional Research Service,” the report says. “The statute does not appear to be self-executing, but rather seems to require an administrating or implementing authority that is not specifically provided for by the statutory text.”

    The White House said last month that Mr. Obama would voluntarily participate in the health insurance exchange, though the law does not require him or other administration officials to do so. His participation as president may depend on his getting re-elected in 2012.

    Representative Jason Chaffetz, Republican of Utah, said lawmakers were in the same boat as many Americans, trying to figure out what the new law meant for them.

    “If members of Congress cannot explain how it’s going to work for them and their staff, how will they explain it to the rest of America?” Mr. Chaffetz asked in an interview.

    The provision governing members of Congress can be traced to the Senate Finance Committee. When the panel was working on the legislation last September, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, proposed an amendment to require that elected federal officials and all federal employees buy coverage through an exchange, “rather than using the traditional Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.”

    A scaled-back version of the amendment, applying to members of Congress and their aides, was accepted in the committee without objection.

    “The whole point is to make sure political leaders live under the laws they pass for everyone else,” Mr. Grassley said Tuesday. “In this case, after the committee completed its work, the coverage provision was redrafted by others, and that’s where mistakes were made. Congress can and should act to correct the mistakes.”

    The federal employees program, created in 1959, now provides coverage to eight million people and, according to the Congressional Research Service, is the largest employer-sponsored health insurance program in the country.

  126. wbboei said:
    The dimocratic party must be destroyed if the democratic party is to be resurrected.

    ==================

    That’s not my opinion. Imo we should vote for the best (or best appearing) individuals on both sides.

    Support Dems who supported Hillary; punish Bots; support the better GOPs such as Palin, McCain, etc.

    If (impossible) the whole Dim party were destroyed, there’s no guarantee that whoever takes it over would be HRC/FDR types. More likely the Chicago/ACORN types would grab even more power.

  127. Sarah Palin is a conservative;Paul Ryan is anti-progressive; Teddy and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson were flaming progressives; LBJ was a ‘prudent’ progressive; Bill Clinton was a progressive President; and Hillary calls hersself an early 20th Century progressive. The labels change from liberal to progressive, from progressive to liberal and all things in-between throughout the years. Contrasting politicians comparing the two governing viewpoints is like comparing oranges and apples. Paul Ryan believes: “As the Progressive movement developed, it moved away from its first phase and openly advocated centralized bureaucracies as the real answer to political problems.”

    It boils down to federal government vs state government run by the individuals within the state. It boils down to oppressive bureaucracies vs consitutional origin. Most, if not all, conservatives believe in duty, fiscal responsibility, individual rights, deficit elimination, small government, individual responsibity, and that the constitution is a blueprint for running the country – original origin. Conservatives are against intolerable acts coming from their ‘we the people’ government.

    Most liberals/progresssives believe in wealth redistribution,social justice,plurality, socio-political change, big government by power to the people. The Center for American Progress founder John Podesta described the difference between liberals and progressives this way: “Liberals tend to care more about individual freedom, while progressives care more about the public good.” The liberals/progressives believe that the consititution is a ‘living’ document that can be changed/ignored for individual issues.

    Naming yourself as conservative, liberal, or progressive just names your political viewpoint – how you see our nation being governed. These are political viewpoints – national political viewpoints that lead to worldviews along the same lines. The persons could be registered as Republican, Democratic, or Independent. Even Megan McCain called herself a ‘progressive’ Republican. There are no longer political party distinctions. This makes the Democrat [Dimocrat], Republican parties irrelavant. A voter can no longer determine how a candidate will govern by party label, you know, switching from R to D, and D to R, and D to I, and self named liberals and progressives in both parties.

    Personally, the older I get, the more conservative I want my representatives to govern. But the ‘stealing, bartering away, selling votes’ disease permeates in DC.
    The real question is not what political format you label yourself, or that you get labelled. The real question is DO YOU LOVE THIS COUNTRY AND DO YOU WANT TO TRY TO RESTORE IT? For no matter what your politics, surely you can see that our current path of our nation is unsustainable. Or would you rather wait on the economic collapse that is coming as sure as God made little green apples; first to Greece, then Spain, then California, then the USA? If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem.

  128. A similar comment I submitted earlier remains awaiting moderation.
    Upthread there is a discussion of the site: www votesmart.org
    Please do not confuse it with www smartvoter.org, which is run by the League of Women Voters and offers an abundance of information on elections, ballots. Candidates appear to be welcome to provide their own biographies there.

  129. That’s not my opinion. Imo we should vote for the best
    ——————————–
    Normally that would be correct. But not in this case. Not when the president is destroying the middle class. Not when the members of his party defy the will of the American People. Not when the only difference between an elitist liberal democrat like Pelosi, George Miller, Henry Waxman, and the supposed rock solid conservative democrats i.e. Stupak, Nelson, Landieu, et. al. is THE COST OF THE BRIBE OR THE NATURE OF THE THREAT. These people may be fine as individuals. You may like them personally. I understand that. But as legislators can only act as a group. And as a group they are bad to the bone. Ergo, we must defeat the group i.e. one individual at a time. Lest we forget, the highest priority now is saving the party and the country from the scourge of Obama. Normal qualitative distinctions between candidates must yield to the categorical imperative of restoring checks and balances to the system. We must begin now correcting the mistake of ’08.

  130. I hope ALL of congress and the Fraud end up with no Hell Care, Karma to all of the life-time pretenders that started these wars and rob our taxes while they sit on their cans and pretend to do what is ‘best for American’s’.
    I think they have all done a terrible job…….except Hillary.

    Karma baby.
    You don’t work together (R’s and D’s) and you don’t read the bills, back room deals and fake superstars that never were…fire them all!!!

  131. BTW, I feel the same way about my state’s congressmen/women…I am going to vote 90% of incumbents out of office.

    New blood all around, and fire them if they continue to walk in the same path.

  132. A similar comment I submitted earlier remains awaiting moderation.
    Upthread there is a discussion of the site: www votesmart.org
    Please do not confuse it with www smartvoter.org, which is run by the League of Women Voters and offers an abundance of information on elections, ballots. Candidates appear to be welcome to provide their own biographies there.
    —————————
    That tells you more about what Richard Kimbal (not David Jansen) is up to. He selected a name for his site which is deceptively similar to a legitimate site, as they say in copyright and patent law. And why praytell would he do that? I wonder, really wonder if Barry Goldwater blessed this site. Until recently, Kimball worked for a pittance whereas now he is getting a decent salary. I wonder if Soros is helping him see that ends meet–his and Obama’s.

  133. Confloyd, do research before you consider endorsing Roy Blount from Missouri!

    His son Matt was our last governor and maybe one of the youngest. He did not run for re-election…wanted to spend more time with his family.

    What’s that old saying, “Sometimes all that glitters is NOT gold.”

  134. COINCIDENCE?

    Now that (ahem) “health care is done”, SEIU union prez to resign:

    nytimes.com/2010/04/13/us/13union.html?ref=politics

    Andrew Stern, Head of S.E.I.U., Plans to Step Down
    ===============================

    By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
    Published: April 12, 2010

    Andy Stern, president of the politically potent Service Employees International Union, has told colleagues he plans to step down, two members of his union’s board said Monday.

    “It will be very soon,” said one board member, who insisted on anonymity.

    Another board member said that Mr. Stern, who is 59, was thinking it was time to resign because Congress enacted one of his longtime goals, a health bill.

    Mr. Stern has led the nation’s most politically active union, with 1.9 million members, since 1996. He is known as one of President Obama’s closest labor allies.

    “Andy has always taken the position that people should not stay too long in office,” one board member said, “and it is his job to build the organization and then make room for other people.” Mr. Stern’s plans to resign were first reported by Politico.

    S.E.I.U. leaders said they expected that Anna Burger, the secretary-treasurer, would succeed Mr. Stern.

    Over the last year, Mr. Stern has been involved in fierce battles with two other unions, a large breakaway S.E.I.U. local in the San Francisco Bay area, and Unite Here, the union representing hotel and restaurant workers.

    Mr. Stern has become a lighting rod within labor, ever since he led a half dozen unions to quit the A.F.L.-C.I.O., the nation’s main labor federation, in 2005. His union, which represents hundreds of thousands of health-care workers and janitors, asserted that the A.F.L.-C.I.O. had grown stodgy and was doing far too little to unionize workers.

    While some union backers praise Mr. Stern as an innovative leader who has made labor a more potent force in politics, others criticize him for being divisive and too quick to make concessions to companies and political leaders. He was also criticized for reaching secret agreements with some companies that he did not disclose to the rank and file.

    As one index of his power and proximity to the president, official records show that he visited the White House more than 20 times during Mr. Obama’s first six months in office. Not only that, the White House political director, Patrick Gaspard, had been the political director of the S.E.I.U.’s giant health-care local in New York, and Craig Becker, a newly appointed member of the National Labor Relations Board, was associate general counsel to the union.

    Mr. Stern is set to step down without having achieved one of his major goals, passage of The Employee Free Choice Act, a bill that would make it easier to unionize workers.

    In the past, Mr. Stern has talked of having a mandatory retirement age for union leaders and even having term limits for union leaders.

  135. Craig Becker is big trouble for the private sector. One of the targets he will attack is the independent contractor doctrine. Employers avoid billions of dollars in taxes, by making some or all of the people who work for them independent contractors rather than employees. As independent contractors they are responsible for their own insurance, and the company makes no workman’s compensation payments to the state. States like California are broke and need money wherever they can steal it. Unions want to organize these people as employees of the company because they can then demand higher wages and benefits. Existing Board Law makes these cases difficult for unions to win. Becker, along with Wilma Lieberman will try to change the law based on a so called economic realities test. The Courts of Appeal, as presently constituted will be inclined to strike down such interpretations, except for the 9th Circuit in California. This issue is as important to unions as card check. If Becker et al succeed, it may have a further adverse effect on jobs and the economy.

  136. confloyd
    April 13th, 2010 at 2:03 am
    I watched Rubio the other morning on TV and I was unimpressed..he stumbled with the questions of which I can’t remember…everytime I have heard Paul Ryan he was like the male version of Hillary with the answers…So unless he turns out to be a male chauvanist and a total Bible thumper I might like him to run.
    ********************

    I think you need to dig a little deeper than quotes from wiki per mj before making a decision on Ryan….

  137. I checked out Roy Blunt and he is bad and bad to the bone…he lost me when he said insurance should have to right to refuse enrollee on pre-existing conditions…yet he works for the people of this country and not for the insurance company…I think he needs to go without insurance and let him get turned down a few time because he a little overweight/or has a little trouble with his blood pressure…I bet then he would come around to my idea of who he should be taking care…the people…not the corporation!

  138. ShortTermer, That was the question that I was throwing around several weeks ago. I was saying how in the world can a person tell who is the progressive repub or conservative repub and who can tell who is the right kind of liberal…they all lie and are all bought off. This is what got me into trouble here several weeks ago.

    So you actually answered my question…there is no easy way to figure it out, so I say we should fire all the incumbents and research the new ones and watch the new ones very carefully. I think term limits is also one of the good things we can do.

    I think the congress and senate should have the crap insurance/medicare we got.

  139. Shorttermer, One more thing…there’s lots of folks in this country who could care less about voting, researching or participating in politics at all. So when the govt/country collapses, you better betcha everyone will wake up and pay attention then…right??

  140. ShortTermer, Your right about that, but what can we do, people are just to busy to care.

    AmericanGirl, that’s really astounding….how’s he getting away with this and the nightly news isn’t bitching about it??? I wonder if we are already owned by China and the Soviet’s? It seems that Obama wanted to rub the press’s nose in it, didn’t he??

    Something very strange is going on in Washington…what if this NUKE summit isn’t really a NUke summit but a way to get everyone together to sell the spoils, LOL!

  141. For any of you that have never visited Cinie’s blog…she has another great, humorous post.
    She has a way with words and here is a taste…she is comparing the political game to a game of poker in this post, and includes PUMAs…

    [snip]

    At the same time, other players in the game, losing badly hand after hand, took note of his methods. Soon, they, too began to play by the same rules, modifying them only slightly to fit the race card-filled hands they were being dealt. Those who didn’t play along by the new rules, especially those committed to the limited play of the once wild gender cards up their sleeves, watched in horror as said cards were increasingly devalued, and soon found themselves forced from the game. What good is having all four queens if everybody else has a handful of flaming jokers?

    By the time this chick contingent realized that the game was rigged, with all the other players being colluding cheats staked by the same sponsors, it was too late. Many, seeing no reason to stand around and cheerlead, bringing the boys luck, drinks and snacks on demand, not only dropped out, they went home and stayed there.

    [snip]

    http://cinie.wordpress.com/2010/04/13/playing-with-fire/#comments

  142. AmericanGal

    What is going on with Obama shunning the press lately?
    ———
    You haven’t seen enough of his mug lately?
    Every time he reads his teleprompter, his polls circle the drain.

  143. Just voted in the Texas Repub primary run off…Wow how things have changed. Two women and a hispanic to boot!

  144. File this under “Dude, we need a revolution…TERM LIMITS ANYONE” !!!! Found link @ BP
    ****************

    Congress sees no budget rush

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/35647.html

    Congress is poised to miss its April 15 deadline for finishing next year’s budget without even considering a draft in either chamber.

    Unlike citizens’ tax-filing deadline, Congress’s mid-April benchmark is nonbinding. And members seem to be in no rush to get the process going.

    Indeed, some Democratic insiders suspect that leaders will skip the budget process altogether this year — a way to avoid the political unpleasantness of voting on spending, deficits and taxes in an election year — or simply go through a few of the motions, without any real effort to complete the w

    More @ link

  145. cut and paste, cut and paste…
    **************

    Posted by Karl Denninger in Federal Reserve at 13:57

    Did The Fed Just (Surreptitiously) Bail Out Europe?
    No, not just Greece – all of Europe. Without Congressional authorization or notice, of course.

    Hattip to a nice emailer….

    Or if you prefer it on a one-year time scale…

    That nice little vertical line is a gain of $421.8 billion dollars of outstanding loans and leases in one week’s time.

    WHERE THE HELL DID THAT MONEY GO AND WHAT COLLATERAL WAS TAKEN AGAINST A FOUR HUNDRED BILLION DOLLAR INCREASE IN OUTSTANDING LOANS?

    You won’t find anything like that in the records – because it’s never happened before. That’s beyond unprecedented, it’s ridiculous, and assuming it’s also accurate, someone has some ‘splaining to do on what clearly appears to be some sort of back-door game being run.

    Update: It has been suggested that this may be related to the FASB changes and securitized loans coming back on the balance sheet. If so, where’s the alleged memorandum items on the other side and the footnote on FRED? The latter is missing, but the necessary data on FRED to confirm that is not yet updated.

    Nonetheless, if this is the case, it’s still bad (just not catastrophic) as this will directly hit capital ratios. Or, put another way, where’s the additional capital that “should” be there to support what is now on balance sheet and was previously off (never mind that it was crooked as hell to have it off in the first place!)

  146. Taking the Fight to the MSM: Andrew Breitbart At the Southern Republican Leadership Conference

    http://tinyurl.com/y2xj7rn

    Snips

    Andrew Breitbart at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

    On racism:

    Why is it that the left is allowed to throw around the dangerous accusation of racism, without any evidence, as a means to malign half the country? Yet, if I want to use the word “socialist,” I have to go to the DNC and get a notary public to sign it for me.

    On the famous Congressional Black Caucus walk through the Tea Partiers on Capitol Hill:

    They were all fishing for hate, and they got nothing. So what did they do? They went to the mainstream media and they said that the ‘N-word’ was said fifteen times.

    On the media assault on conservatives:
    This is an attack on the American people. This is who the left is in this country, this is why they want to fundamentally change it because they think we’re inherently terrible and we need to be socially engineered.

    On Saul Alinsky and the Left:

    You’d better go get Rules for Radicals right now… the greatest thing that the left does, and it uses the the media to do it, is that it accuses you of what they’re doing to you.

    On the Mainstream Media:

    The Mainstream Media wanted Barack Obama elected.

    Video @ link

  147. Coburn from OK is on O’Reily trying to explain himself and why he dissed Fox and likes Botox Nan…

  148. I called his offices last week and told them he needed to go on Fox and explain himself. They didn’t like what I said, but apparently he was pressured by enough people. Wbb had a really good write up on Coburn and the meaning of what he said and I used it! Plagiarism @ it’s best. Just ask Hussein!

  149. Maybe he thinks he’s asking for a dance partner. Do they do this crap all over in Hawaii, or just in IslamoFacist countries that want to destroy us? Could answer a few questions!
    ****************************

    Another Obama ‘bow’ flap

    President Obama greets Chinese President Hu Jintao.

    CAPTIONBy Jim Watson, AFP/Getty ImagesWe had a feeling this picture was going to get some attention.

    Sure enough, Fox News, the Drudge Report, and conservative bloggers have focused on another example of President Obama bowing to another foreign leader, in this case Chinese President Hu Jintao.

    “He just can’t help himself,” writes Gateway Pundit. “What a disgrace.”

    The Hot Air website writes that, “I don’t know if I’ve gotten used to him doing this or if it’s a small relief to see him not go quite as perpendicular as he did for the Japanese emperor, but my heart-ache isn’t as pronounced as it was in the past.”

    Media Matters, which collected these and other comments, denounced what it called the conservative media’s “tired obsession with Obama’s supposed bowing.”

    (Posted by David Jackson)

  150. Really long, and I apologize, but you really need to read it. Heres the link if you want to check out the pics. Don’t hate me for the lenght…

    http://biggovernment.com/mvadum/2010/04/13/exclusive-radical-awakening-from-america-hater-to-hero/#more-104670

    EXCLUSIVE: Radical Awakening: From America Hater to Heroby Matthew Vadum

    From the April 2010 issue of Townhall
    magazine:

    Brandon Darby learned something from Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela. Once a hard-core radical who sided with progressive revolutionaries, Darby prevented a left-wing terrorist attack on the 2008 GOP convention. Now, this America-loving patriot is the target of the domestic extremists he once called “friends.”

    Did you know that a courageous former radical helped to avert a planned left-wing terrorist attack at the 2008 Republican National Convention that might have killed who knows how many Americans?

    Neither did I until recently.

    That’s because if you disrupt a terrorist attack on Americans by Islamic fundamentalists as Northwest Flight 253 passenger Jasper Schuringa did on Christmas Day, you’re a hero; however, if you take the initiative to undermine a terrorist attack on Americans by supposedly well intentioned left-wing fundamentalists, you might as well be a terrorist yourself.

    Brandon Darby, who in recent years also refused leftists’ invitations to get involved in Venezuelan communist subversion here in America and in anti-Israeli terrorism in Palestine, learned this unpalatable truth the hard way.

    The Left-Wing Plot to Kill Republicans

    After years of in-your-face protests, confrontational tactics and working with America-haters, Darby eventually experienced a political epiphany. He rejected the radical Left and its culture of political violence. He came to realize that America, for all its faults, wasn’t such a bad place after all.

    “I felt I had a duty to atone after badmouthing my country for so many years,” Darby told me in an interview. “I love my country.”

    But Darby didn’t always love his country.

    Darby previously considered himself a revolutionary. His charisma and militant anti-Americanism made the intense Texan a larger-than-life figure among leftist activists in the South.

    He openly called for the overthrow of the U.S. government, which he considered too corrupt and oppressive to be reformed. He expressed his hatred of police as guardians of the status quo. He consorted with eco-terrorist tree-spikers, radical feminists and black nationalists.

    He was approached to rob an armored car and asked to commit arson to fight gentrification. He mouthed politically correct slogans and platitudes about the Bush administration. Government didn’t care about people, and in his eyes, the much-maligned response to Hurricane Katrina proved it.

    But around the same time, the former radical community organizer was turning away from radicalism, and at tremendous personal risk, he undermined a leftwing terrorist plot to attack the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn. If he hadn’t taken action, Americans exercising their free speech rights and police officers might have been killed.

    Without informing his fellow anarchists, Darby offered his assistance to the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force and, at the FBI’s request, infiltrated a leftwing group known as the Austin Affinity Group. The outfit had joined with a larger coalition of progressive organizations that facetiously called itself the “RNC Welcoming Committee.” The committee hoped to lay siege to the GOP convention that nominated the presidential ticket of John McCain and Sarah Palin.

    The FBI sent Darby to meet with anarchists who were developing their plan at a bookstore in Austin.

    “It was a group of people whose explicit purpose was to organize a group of ‘black bloc’ anarchists to shut the Republican convention down by any means necessary,” he explained. “They showed videos of people throwing Molotov cocktails, and they were giving people ideas.”

    The two 20-something plotters on whom Darby informed, David Guy McKay and Bradley Neil Crowder, had made homemade riot shields and were ready to use them in St. Paul to help demonstrators block streets near the Xcel Energy Center in order to prevent GOP delegates from participating in the convention. The shields were discovered and confiscated.

    But McKay and Crowder were undeterred by this setback. Together they manufactured instruments of death calculated to inflict maximum pain and bodily harm on people whose political views they disagreed with.

    During a search of a residence, police found gas masks, slingshots, helmets, knee pads and eight Molotov cocktails consisting of bottles filled with gasoline with attached wicks made from tampons.

    “They mixed gasoline with oil so it would stick to clothing and skin and burn longer,” Darby told me.

    Thanks to Darby’s cooperation with the FBI, the two anarchist would-be bomb throwers are now languishing in prison. McKay entered a “guilty” plea and was sentenced in May 2009 to 48 months in prison plus three years of supervised release for possession of an unregistered “firearm,” illegal manufacture of a firearm and possession of a firearm with no serial number. A week before, Crowder cut a deal with prosecutors and was sentenced to 24 months in prison for possession of an unregistered firearm.

    McKay received the stiffer sentence in part because he fabricated a tall tale about Darby’s involvement in the plot.

    During sentencing, U.S. District Judge Michael Davis went out of his way to make a specific legal finding that McKay obstructed justice by falsely accusing Darby of inducing him to manufacture the incendiary devices.

    Davis told McKay he crossed the line between peaceful dissent and violent protest. “You were leading the charge. You and Crowder were coming up here [to Minnesota] to do anarchy against the system.”

    But now the story takes a strange turn.

    After Darby, who until the end of 2008 had been a confidential FBI informant, revealed that he had worked with authorities to pre-empt the violent conspiracy, he became the subject of a campaign of vilification by the Left.

    Google Darby’s name and the words “snitch” and “rat” appear. Cyber-squatters appropriated his name and created a hateful Web site to defame him.

    The floodgates of abuse burst open after Darby acknowledged in an open letter posted at an alternative news Web site that not only had he worked with the FBI, but he also “strongly” stood behind his decision to do so.

    The irretrievably liberal New York Times ignored his heroism. A Jan. 5, 2009, article focused not on Darby’s lifesaving intervention but on the feelings of “betrayal” his former allies in left-wing anarchist circles were experiencing.

    The paper showed how shocked and appalled Scott Crow, who with Darby co-founded the Common Ground Relief agency in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, was after learning about Darby’s cooperation with the FBI.

    “I put it all on the line to defend him when accusations first came out,” Crow said. “Brandon Darby is somebody I had entrusted with my life in New Orleans, and now I feel endangered by him.” Why someone who presumably hadn’t committed a crime would feel “endangered” by knowing an FBI informant is unclear.

    ACORN founder Wade Rathke (shown at left in above photo), who worked as a professional agitator for the violent Students for a Democratic Society in the 1960s, would have preferred that Republican delegates be incinerated.

    He denounced Darby for working with the authorities to disrupt the domestic terrorists. “It seemed so, how should I say it, ’60s?”

    It’s “one thing to disagree, but it’s a whole different thing to rat on folks,” Rathke wrote on his blog.

    This response to ideological apostasy is not altogether surprising. Leftists who abandon their faith are demonized by their former co-religionists. Relentless attacks on Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore and former radical David Horowitz continue to the present day, decades after they moved rightward.

    Right-Wing Violence Bad, Left-Wing Violence Good?

    Compare the treatment of Darby at the hands of the Left to the respectful— often groveling—treatment afforded ObamaCare architect Robert Creamer.

    A HuffingtonPost.com contributor and husband of shrill socialist Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., Creamer served prison time for kiting checks and failing to pay withholding taxes for his leftist nonprofit, Illinois Public Action Fund. Just like his liberal friends in Congress and the Obama administration, he refused to roll back spending and instead created a modified Ponzi scheme in order to continue drawing his full $100,000 salary.

    This crusader for social justice and political consultant to Democratic Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and impeached Democratic Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich even whined at his 2006 sentencing that he received a five-month period of incarceration, well below the 30 to 37 months called for in federal sentencing guidelines. The media failed to call him on it.

    Convicted cop-killing activists Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu-Jamal are legends on the Left. Black Panther Abu-Jamal in particular enjoys a cult following among radicals even though no serious person—including Abu-Jamal himself, who failed to claim to be innocent at his trial—contests that in 1981 he shot and killed Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner in cold blood.

    Creamer, Peltier and Abu-Jamal are all heroes to the Left no matter what they did, and to some precisely because of what they did.

    This is because on the Left there is a presumption of good intentions even by fellow-traveling terrorists. As left-wing talk radio host Thom Hartmann told me last year: “My left-wing crazies are better than your right-wing crazies.”

    Hartmann explained:

    “Your right-wing crazies are incited to violence based on fear and hate of people because of whom they are, because they’re gay, because they’re Catholic, because they’re Jewish, because they’re black, because they’re Hispanic. And our left-wing crazies are incited to violence because they’re trying to create a better world. They’re trying to save the environment in the case of the eco-terrorists. They’re trying to end the Vietnam War in the case of the Weather Underground. They’re trying to bring about civil rights in the case of the Symbionese Liberation Army and some of the other black terrorist groups that were operating in the 1970s” (emphasis added).

    To the Left, violent acts aimed at desirable ends are worthy of praise, especially if aimed at the other side.

    Internationally known Marxist author Naomi Klein has praised the riots that took place during the 1999 World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle and openly called for violence at the 2004 Republican convention, urging protesters to bring the Iraq War to the streets of New York City. The Canadian writer wasn’t ostracized by the Left after her outrageous statement; if anything, her public stature has only grown since 2004.

    If right-wing terrorists plotted to attack a Democratic National Convention, whoever foiled the conspiracy would be immortalized in film, literature and song as a savior of democracy.

    “If you flip the equation around and it had been a group of conservatives threatening to use force to prevent those on the Left from meeting, everyone would expect the government to infiltrate them and they would also expect the FBI to stop them and charge them with crimes,” Darby said.

    “But when it’s leftists that organize to prevent Republicans from being able to meet, then all of a sudden it’s considered government oppression. There’s something wrong with that, and no one points that out, and it’s really offensive and damaging to our system.”

    Social justice-oriented terrorism isn’t ugly and anti-American, according to the nation’s entertainment-media complex; it’s downright praiseworthy and hip. So it should come as no surprise that Crowder and McKay are in the process of being rehabilitated by the Left.

    Early on, the duo became a cause célèbre for the Left, dubbed the Texas 2. Now documentary filmmakers are currently making a movie about them called—you guessed it—“Better This World.” The documentary, which is reportedly in the post-production phase, received an HBO Documentary Films Fellowship.

    No doubt there will be more praise heaped on them as they ascend to the Left’s pantheon of social justice champions, joining Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn and the Unabomber.

    The Journal Away From Radicalism

    But no one is singing the praises of Darby, a genuine American hero.

    Born in Pasadena, Texas, in 1976, Darby’s efforts in post-Katrina New Orleans were highlighted favorably in the media, most notably in a Jonathan Demme documentary that was shown on the “Tavis Smiley Show” on PBS.

    When Darby learned people were suffering in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, he moved there, defying police orders not to enter the stricken city. With $50, he co-founded Common Ground in the home of Malik Rahim, a veteran community organizer and former Black Panther who did prison time for armed robbery.

    “When we started, everyone in the city was armed, everyone was scared, and there was a complete lack of law enforcement,” said Darby. “The few roving bands of law enforcement that were present didn’t like us very much because of the fact that we were involved with people like Malik Rahim, who to this day continues to advocate for those who have attacked law enforcement personnel.”

    “We were young, we were caught up in the fervor of helping others and fighting injustice, and at that time, we couldn’t see why people like law enforcement didn’t like Malik,” Darby said.

    Common Ground was no mere relief agency. It was a group of far-Left revolutionaries who viewed their work as an extension of their politics.

    In a promotional video, Rahim thunders to volunteers: “You are showing this government that the people, that the people in this country do care for peace and justice and that we will stand for peace and justice and that we will do what it takes to restore peace and justice back to America.”

    When Common Ground was threatened, the radical Left mobilized to defend it. Police were “freaked out because there were all these Black Panthers who’d had shootouts with the police years ago, and they’re in this house and they refused to leave, so it turned into this really stressful ordeal,” Darby explained.

    Despite many obstacles, Common Ground quickly became a successful nonprofit group that helped alleviate the suffering of poor people in the devastated city, especially in the hard-hit 9th Ward.

    Supported by donations that flowed in from across the country, in its first three years 22,000 volunteers worked for Common Ground. A magnet for outraged radicals ranging from garden variety collectivists to militant vegans to pagan lesbians, the group gutted flood damaged houses without bothering to obtain permits and provided free health care and meals.

    The group was profiled by ABC’s “Nightline,” and the media treated Darby as a savior. With its contributions to the city, the group began to wield political influence, Darby said. Even its initial detractors begrudgingly admitted Common Ground’s positive impact on the Crescent City.

    Over time, a lot of the things Darby experienced with Common Ground led him to question his political beliefs, and these experiences offer a window into what happens when the radical Left takes over an area.

    In bed with real-estate developers, New Orleans wanted to use eminent domain to condemn many vacant flood damaged houses. According to Darby, many anarchists refused to join his fight to protect the property rights of homeowners, because they didn’t believe in private property.

    “I just started putting the call out, and all these libertarians, Republicans and Democrats, started showing up. And what we would do was any time there were bulldozers we would just get in front of them and wouldn’t let them work,” he said.

    “We had our lawyers file lawsuits, and so next thing you know, they backed away from it. And they started to work with us to identify where the residents were, and we’d ask the residents if they wanted their place demolished or not.”

    Darby defied the politically correct “consensus” method of group decision making and riled feathers by daring to tell aimless volunteers what to do. After vegan volunteers took over the Common Ground kitchen and tried to inflict their dietary preferences on the poor, it occurred to Darby that the leftist-anarchist approach with its aversion to hierarchy would never work in the real world.

    “Like most people driven by a strong dogma, the majority of the people who took over were from Berkeley, and they came in under the guise of helping,” he said.

    “They tried to use the experience to ‘correct’ the culture and lifestyle of the working-class poor. They tried to use the black residents of New Orleans as lab rats and guinea pigs, and I didn’t like that at all—and the residents didn’t like it either.”

    For example, some of the activists tried to organize the residents into “collectives,” and another group of gay activists took over part of a church that had donated its space to help relief efforts. “We were helping to rebuild the church, but then some radicals took over and started using over half the space and designated it as a ‘queer safe place,’” Darby said.

    This infuriated the church leadership who were already uncomfortable with being associated with so many radical activists.

    “It’s not about you coming here and creating your utopia,” Darby explained.

    “It’s about helping these residents and making them feel comfortable. The radicals wanted to make residents sit through political orientations in order to get fed. I objected and that got me called a dictator.”

    Common Ground leaders continued to insist on indoctrinating young volunteers and on continuing with in-your-face protest tactics, which lost their usefulness after the group became well established and had connections with people in the city, Darby said.

    “The people making decisions for the city about how aid was distributed and about where FEMA work crews and search-and-rescue crews operated, developed relationships with us,” he explained. “They were completely open to hear our perspective and wanted us to participate in what decisions were made, but unfortunately many of the other community organizers were stuck in a fight-the-power dogma, which ultimately hindered their ability to serve those in need. There was no official of local government there that we couldn’t call on their cell phone and set up a dinner meeting with or enjoy a cup of coffee with.”

    After initially having rocky relations with the New Orleans Police and other local authority figures, Darby came to realize that, in the hurricane-ravaged city, relief volunteers and the authorities were on the same side—both sides wanted to help people.

    Darby’s “eureka” moment came as he began to accept the idea that not everyone in government was a villain.

    He credits Maj. John Bryson of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD) with helping him to stop viewing everyone in government as the enemy.

    Bryson (pictured above), who, in the wake of Katrina, was the NOPD’s 5th District commander, an area that encompassed the especially hard-hit Lower 9th Ward, observed Darby’s transformation over time.

    When Bryson first met Darby, he was “so up in my face it was unbelievable,” Bryson told me. “Radical” was too weak a word to describe Darby, Bryson said.

    When the two first met, Darby promised that his fellow activists would be videotaping police and that they wouldn’t hesitate to report anything they didn’t like to the media. Bryson helped to improve the relationship by giving Darby his cell phone number and told him to contact him directly if police officers misbehaved.

    Bryson offered to help Darby but cautioned him that “if we find that you are not here to help our citizens, then we’re going to have a problem,” Bryson explained, “and that was our agreement.”

    Over time, the two, who had been filled with mutual distrust and hostility, began to get along, even to like each other as friends.

    Bryson watched Common Ground—which, in the immediate aftermath of Katrina, he said, had more people on the ground than the federal government—begin to flourish. The group opened shelters for women, families and children, offering services to locals that governments at the time were unable to provide.

    As relations with the police improved dramatically, Darby confessed to Bryson that he had never had this kind of positive relationship with any kind of law enforcement personnel. The feeling was mutual.

    Bryson praised Darby for cooperating with the FBI:

    “Everybody [on the Left] hates Brandon because he did the right thing for the right reasons. Anytime anyone in this country, in this state, in this city, or even in this world is going to do some horrible things to innocent people, if a good man does not stand up, or a good woman for that matter, then we’re in trouble. And Brandon stood up and did the right thing. He stole my heart as he said, ‘I thought about you and how well you worked with us, and I couldn’t see innocent people getting hurt.’”

    Plots Abroad

    Although Darby’s positive experiences with New Orleans police had forced him to begin questioning his anarchist beliefs, a trip to Marxist Venezuela helped to kill off his remaining radical impulses.

    The trip came as the U.S. government was taking a beating in the media for its post-Katrina relief efforts. At the time, Venezuela’s communist strongman, Hugo Chavez, began trying to embarrass the Bush administration by offering aid to the Katrina-hit Gulf Coast.

    Chavez had already been running what political scientists call a “public diplomacy” campaign in the U.S. to help bolster American support for his regime. The propaganda effort consisted of funneling discounted home heating oil to former U.S. Rep. Joe Kennedy’s, D-Mass., nonprofit group, Citizens Energy Corp. The nonprofit then distributed the oil to poor people, and Kennedy (pictured above behind lectern) went on TV to berate the Bush administration, which he said “cut fuel assistance.” Kennedy boosted his benefactor, boasting in a commercial that “CITGO, owned by the Venezuelan people,” had helped poor Americans while their own government stood idly by.

    Darby traveled to Caracas in 2006 as part of a Common Ground delegation to the Chavez government to seek funding to keep Common Ground afloat.

    “I had this idea of having ‘Chavez trailers’ for displaced residents to live in. This would embarrass FEMA into supplying trailers,” he said.

    Darby said he didn’t realize when he came up with the concept that using money from abroad to influence the U.S. government might be illegal, but Chavez government officials he met with insisted it would violate U.S. law.

    “They told me I would get in trouble, and they wanted to work out a way to make the project happen,” he said.

    In the month he was there, Venezuelan officials introduced him to executives of PDVSA, the government-owned oil company that owns CITGO, which operates a chain of gas stations in the U.S. They pressured Darby to journey to neighboring Colombia to meet with a group aligned with the narco-terror organization FARC and to visit another revolutionary group in Maracaibo, Venezuela.

    According to Darby, Chavez wanted to create a terrorist network in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina. This is the same Chavez who blamed the recent earthquake in Haiti on the United States and who called President George W. Bush “the Devil” during a United Nations speech, so some might find his efforts at subversive activities in the United States hard to take seriously. However, it’s important to remember that Chavez has close ties to Iran and Cuba and allows terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah to operate offices in Caracas.

    (Long before he learned of the RNC plot, Darby reached out to the FBI to undermine terrorism. A longtime Texas friend, the late Riad Hamad [pictured above], had tried to hijack Darby’s plan to provide medical assistance in war-torn parts of the world. Darby wanted to create a group called Critical Response that would have sent medics into war zones to help civilians caught in the crossfire in places such as Lebanon and Darfur. Hamad, founder of the much-investigated Palestinian Children’s Welfare Fund, told him he wanted to send medics to Israel and put explosives on motorcycles and boobytrap ambulances in order to kill Jews. Hamad also hatched an elaborate plan to funnel money to Hamas and Hezbollah. Around the same time, Darby viewed a very graphic Israeli first responders’ training video. “At the time I was conflicted about what to do, but seeing the dead bodies of Israeli children in that tape made the so-called Palestinian activists’ chant ‘no justice, no peace,’ take on a whole new meaning. I decided the only ethical thing to do was to tell law enforcement what I knew.”)

    To Darby’s astonishment, during his stay in Caracas, senior officials in the Chavez government and in PDVSA told him they wanted him to create a revolutionary army of guerrillas in the swamps of Louisiana.

    “At the very last meeting they ramped up the pressure,” Darby said. They taunted him, saying, “What? You’re not a revolutionary?”

    Despite intense pressure from his Venezuelan hosts, he refused. This was the last straw for him.

    “I realized I didn’t like Venezuela, the authoritarianism of it, and I started to realize how brilliant and miraculous the American system of checks and balances was,” Darby said. “There was still something brilliant about the fact that this nation had institutionalized a system of checks and balances that has been working since this nation was founded. I realized just how hard a task that is.”

    Common Ground, divided by radical factions with harebrained ideas constantly warring with each other, was a living example of left-wing radicalism in action.

    “When I would leave Common Ground for a few days I would be worried that a power vacuum could develop and factions could displace me while I was away, and that’s just the way things are in places like Venezuela,” he said. “It is actually absurd to want the United States government to go away, and that’s when it really hit me that my ideas were wrong.”

    Darby said he’s still proud of his Common Ground experience on the whole. “I’m proud of helping people, but I’m ashamed of what I used to believe,” Darby admitted.

    “Thankfully, I had the honor of serving my country by working undercover with the FBI and participating in efforts to protect the safety and civil rights of others.”

    (This article appears in the current issue of Townhall magazine and is posted here with the magazine’s permission.)

Comments are closed.